HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013 12 18 AIS DPW RS Springfield Development Code AmendmentsAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 12/18/2013
Meeting Type: Regular Meeting
Staff Contact/Dept.: Gary M. Karp DPW
Staff Phone No: 541-726-1674 Estimated Time: 30 Minutes
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Encourage Economic Development and Revitalization through
Community Partnerships ITEM TITLE: SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE (SDC) AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE
PROPOSED URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY (UGB) EXPANSION
ACTION
REQUESTED:
The Planning Commission is asked to: 1) Conduct a public hearing to receive
testimony on the proposed SDC amendments; and 2) Forward recommendation to the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners regarding co-adoption of a land use policy package that includes these amendments.
ISSUE
STATEMENT:
Springfield is proposing to amend its UGB to add suitable large employment land
sites to the City’s buildable land inventory and to bring public land designated for public/semi-public, parks and open space uses into the UGB. New land added to the
UGB must be designated and zoned at the time of the UGB amendment.
Springfield must also update the Public Land and Open Space (PLO) Zoning District to address the Springfield Utility Board’s (SUB) and Willamalane Parks and
Recreation District’s (WPRD) current and future land uses in these areas that currently are outside the UGB.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report 2. Proposed SDC Amendments 3. Order and Recommendation
DISCUSSION: Regarding the Proposed AG Zoning District: The proposed AG Zoning District is required to implement the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic and
Urbanization Element policies that Springfield, in cooperation with Lane County, will
be adopting in early 2014 to expand its UGB in order to provide suitable large employment land sites to the City’s buildable land inventory for economic
development and employment growth in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 9, Economic Development and Goal 14, Urbanization. New land added to the UGB must be planned and zoned at the time of UGB expansion. The proposed AG Zoning
District will be applied in newly-urbanizable lands (proposed UGB expansion areas) that are proposed to be designated Urban Holding Area-Employment (UHA-E). Currently, most of the proposed UGB expansion areas have a Metro Plan land use
designation of Agriculture and Lane County Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) zoning. The proposed AG Zoning District is “interim” and is intended to protect future
employment sites that have special characteristics by limiting land divisions and
allowing only farm related uses until such time annexation to Springfield occurs and the appropriate “employment” land use designation and zoning is applied.
Regarding the Proposed Amendments to the PLO Zoning District: During the
preparation of suitable potential UGB expansion sites, staff added the South Millrace to the list. The South Millrace area contains a number of properties owned by public
agencies: the Springfield Utility Board (SUB); the Willamalane Park and Recreation
District (WPRD); and the City. Even if the Springfield City Council and the Lane Count Board of Commissioners decide not to include the South Millrace area as part of the
proposed UGB expansion, the City’s PLO Zoning District will still need amendment to
apply City-wide. Staff has reviewed the current PLO Zoning District permitted use list a found it did not include a number of uses required by SUB and WPRD in order to meet
their current and future development needs. Staff has met with representatives of both agencies and the proposed amendments to the PLO Zoning District include the expansio of the permitted use list.
The Planning Commission held a work session on the proposed SDC amendments on November 19, 2013. Neither the Planning Commission nor staff has made any changes
to the proposed amendments.
ATTACHMENT 1
STAFF REPORT, FINDINGS AND ORDER
City of Springfield
Springfield Development Code Amendments
Nature of Request: Staff is requesting that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a
recommendation of approval to the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of
Commissioners regarding the following proposed amendments to the Springfield
Development Code:
1 Add SDC 3.2-900 et Seq. to establish the Agricultural (AG) Zoning District. The proposed
AG Zoning District is required to implement the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Economic and Urbanization Element policies that Springfield, in cooperation with Lane
County, will be adopting in early 2014 to expand its UGB in order to provide suitable
large employment land sites to the City’s buildable land inventory for economic
development and employment growth in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 9,
Economic Development and Goal 14, Urbanization. New land added to the UGB must be
planned and zoned at the time of UGB expansion. The proposed AG Zoning District will
be applied in newly-urbanizable lands (proposed UGB expansion areas) that are
proposed to be designated Urban Holding Area-Employment (UHA-E). Currently, most of
the proposed UGB expansion areas have a Metro Plan land use designation of
Agriculture and Lane County Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) zoning. The proposed AG Zoning
District is “interim” and is intended to protect future employment sites that have special
characteristics by limiting land divisions and allowing only farm related uses until such
time annexation to Springfield occurs and the appropriate “employment” land use
designation and zoning is applied.
2. Amend SDC 3.2-700 et Seq. During the preparation of suitable potential UGB expansion
sites, staff added the South Millrace to the list. The South Millrace area contains a
number of properties owned by public agencies: the Springfield Utility Board (SUB); the
Willamalane Park and Recreation District (WPRD); and the City. Even if the Springfield
City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners decide not to include the
South Millrace area as part of the proposed UGB expansion, the City’s PLO Zoning
District will still need amendment to apply City-wide. Staff has reviewed the current PLO
Zoning District permitted use list and found it did not include a number of uses required
by SUB and WPRD in order to meet their current and future development needs. Staff
has met with representatives of both agencies and the proposed amendments to the
PLO Zoning District include the expansion of the permitted use list.
3. Amend Subsection 4.7-200 Public Parks
4. Amend/Add definitions SDC 6.1-110 related to the above.
Future Action: The adopting Ordinance for the proposed SDC amendments will be
forwarded to the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners for
their consideration as part of the City’s Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan and UGB Metro
Plan amendment request. A City/County joint public hearing is scheduled for February 24,
2014. The proposed AG Zoning District and the Metro Plan UHA-E land use designation will
be adopted concurrently with the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan and UGB Metro Plan
amendment request.
Springfield
File Number:
TYP413-00007
Attachment 1, Page 1 of 36
BACKGROUND
Until 2007, Springfield and Eugene shared a single UGB, jointly adopted by the governing bodies
of the two cities and Lane County. At that time, the Oregon legislature passed House Bill 3337
(2007 Or Laws Chapter 650). HB 3337 required Springfield and Eugene to determine housing
needs separately and to adopt separate UGBs.
The Springfield UGB, the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing
Element and Housing Needs Analysis (RLHNA) were adopted was adopted by City Council
Ordinance 6268 on June 20, 2011 and by Lane County Board of Commissioners Ordinance
PA1274 on June 6, 2011. The Springfield UGB, RLHNA and the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Housing Element were acknowledged by DLCD in September 2011.
Simultaneously with the RLHNA, the City conducted an inventory and analysis to determine
employment land need for the planning period 2010-2030. The Springfield Commercial
Industrial Buildable Lands Inventory and Economic Opportunities Analysis (CIBL/EOA) and
Economic Development Objectives and Strategies address land needed for employment for the
planning period 2010-2030. The CIBL/EOA identifies a deficit of employment sites and a need to
expand the UGB to add employment land with characteristics that cannot be found within the
existing UGB. More specifically, the CIBL/EOA identifies a need for large employment sites
(greater than 20 acres). In response to the conclusions of the analysis, the City developed
policies to address all applicable economic development (Goal 9) and urbanization (Goal 14)
planning requirements. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic and Urbanization
Elements include policies to address the land deficiencies —including a proposal to amend the
UGB to add large employment sites, as well as public land for parks, open space and public and
semi- public facilities.
Proposals to amend the Metro Plan to adopt these changes will be presented to the Springfield
City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners in early 2014, simultaneously with the
proposed implementing measures —the SDC amendments addressed in this staff report. This
staff report thus provides findings to demonstrate how the proposed code provisions implement
those Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan policies as currently drafted, consistent with the
applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Rules and relevant Metro Plan and Springfield
Development Code policies.
CRITERIA OF APPROVAL FOR SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENTS
SDC 5.6-115 lists the following criteria of approval for the amendment of the Springfield
Development Code:
“A. In reaching a decision on the adoption or amendment of refinement plans and this
Code’s text, the City Council shall adopt findings that demonstrate conformance to the
following:
1. The Metro Plan;
Attachment 1, Page 2 of 36
2. Applicable State statutes; and
3. Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules.
B. Applications specified in Section 5.6-105 may require co-adoption by the Lane County
Board of Commissioners.”
These findings address the proposed AG Zoning District and the proposed amended PLO Zoning
District, where applicable.
CRITERION: SDC 5.6-115A.1. Conformance with the Metro Plan
Note: The following findings demonstrate compliance with applicable policies of the Metro Plan
and Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic and Urbanization Elements.
“The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan [Metro Plan] is the official long-
range general plan (public policy document) of metropolitan Lane County and the cities of
Eugene and Springfield. Its policies and land use designations apply only within the area
under the jurisdiction of the Plan. The Plan sets forth general planning policies and land use
allocations and serves as the basis for the coordinated development of programs concerning
the use and conservation of physical resources, furtherance of assets, and development or
redevelopment of the metropolitan area.” P. I-1
“The Metro Plan Diagram is a generalized map and graphic expression of the goals,
objectives, and recommendations found elsewhere in the Metro Plan.” (Ref. P. I -5)
“Land use designations shown in the Metro Plan Diagram are depicted at a metropolitan
scale. Used with the text and local plans and policies, they provide direction for decisions
pertaining to appropriate reuse (redevelopment), urbanization of vacant parcels, and
additional use of underdeveloped parcels.” (Ref. P. II-G-2)
Findings:
For the majority of the properties in the proposed UGB expansion areas, the current Metro Plan
land use designation is Agriculture and the current zoning is Lane County EFU. The proposed AG
Zoning District itself does not amend, and therefore, will not affect any Metro Plan land use
designation or text. What the proposed SDC amendments will achieve is the establishment of
the AG Zoning District that will be applied within the proposed UHA-E land use designation to be
effective upon Springfield City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners adoption of the
UGB expansion areas scheduled for early 2014.
The proposed AG Zoning District zoning district will implement a new UHA-E Metro Plan
designation proposed by the City of Springfield and adopted by the City of Springfield and Lane
County as an amendment to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan diagram
and text. The UHA-E Metro Plan designation will be applied to Springfield’s newly-urbanizable
lands to reserve large employment sites that are uniquely suited to meet the special site needs
of employers in Springfield’s target industries.
Attachment 1, Page 3 of 36
The proposed AG Zoning District zoning district is necessary to address Springfield’s land needs
for the planning period 2010-2030 by reserving large employment sites that are uniquely suited
to meet the special site needs of employers in Springfield’s target industries.
The PLO Zoning District is currently established within the current Public and Semi-Public Metro
Plan land use designation. The proposed PLO Zoning District amendments primarily involve
additions to the permitted use list. The proposed PLO Zoning District amendments will
implement existing Metro Plan designations in Springfield and do not amend and therefore, will
not affect any Metro Plan land use designation or text.
Conclusion:
The proposed SDC amendments do not affect the current Metro Plan diagram or any existing
land use designations.
Findings:
METRO PLAN: C. Growth Management Goals, Findings, and Policies
Policies:
“1. The urban growth boundary and sequential development shall continue to be
implemented as an essential means to achieve compact urban growth. The provision of
all urban services shall be concentrated inside the urban growth boundary.” (Ref. P.
II-C-3)
“8. Land within the UGB may be converted from urbanizable to urban only through
annexation to a city when it is found that:
a. A minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided to the area in
an orderly and efficient manner.
b. There will be a logical area and time within which to deliver urban services and
facilities. Conversion of urbanizable land to urban shall also be consistent with the
Metro Plan.” (Ref. P. II-C-4)
“9. A full range of key urban facilities and services shall be provided to urban areas
according to demonstrated need and budgetary priorities.” (Ref. P. II-C-4)
“16. Ultimately, land within the UGB shall be annexed to a city and provided with the
required minimum level of urban facilities and services. While the time frame for
annexation may vary, annexation should occur as land transitions from urbanizable to
urban.” (Ref. P. II-C-5)
Springfield is proposing to expand its UGB to add suitable large employment land sites to the
City’s buildable land inventory. New land added to the UGB must be designated and zoned at
the time of UGB amendment. As part of that land use decision, Springfield is required to
demonstrate that it has applied interim zoning to the newly-urbanizable land to ensure that
allowed uses will not preclude use of these sites for intended employment purposes. For
property that is outside of Springfield’s city limits, but within its UGB to connect to the public
wastewater system, it must be annexed and be designated and zoned for employment uses. In
order for annexation to occur, compliance with the Metro Plan Growth Management Goals cited
above is required. The timing of annexations will be determined by market demand and
Attachment 1, Page 4 of 36
Springfield’s ability to fund necessary improvements. The proposed AG Zoning District will allow
existing farm uses to continue until annexation can occur, thus preserving suitable large
employment land sites.
Conclusion:
The proposed AG Zoning District will preserve newly urbanized lands designated UHA-E for
future employment use until annexation can occur and these lands can be served with the
required urban facilities and services.
Findings:
METRO PLAN: B. Economic Element
Policies
“B.1 Demonstrate a positive interest in existing and new industries, especially those
providing above average wage and salary levels, an increased variety of job
opportunities, a rise in the standard of living, and utilization of our existing comparative
advantage in the level of education and skill of the resident labor force.” (Ref. III-B-4)
“B.2 Encourage economic development, which utilizes local and imported capital,
entrepreneurial skills, and the resident labor force.” (Ref. III-B-5)
“B.7 Encourage industrial park development, including areas for warehousing and
distributive industries and research and development activities.” (Ref. III-B-5)
“B.9 Encourage the expansion of existing and the location of new manufacturing activities,
which are characterized by low levels of pollution and efficient energy use.” (Ref. III-B-5)
“B.11 Encourage economic activities, which strengthen the metropolitan area’s position as a
regional distribution, trade, health, and service center.” (Ref. III-B-5)
“B.16 Utilize processes and local controls, which encourage retention of large parcels or
consolidation of small parcels of industrially or commercially zoned land to facilitate
their use or reuse in a comprehensive rather than piecemeal fashion.” (Ref. III-B-5)
“B.20 Encourage research and development of products and markets resulting in more
efficient use of underutilized, renewable, and nonrenewable resources, including wood
waste, recyclable materials, and solar energy.” (Ref. III-B-5)
“B.21 Reserve several areas within the UGB for large-scale, campus-type, light manufacturing
uses.” (Ref. III-B-6)
The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element refines Metro Plan Economic Element
Policies applicable to Springfield, based on Springfield’s land inventories and analysis. The City
has identified target industries and has determined that some of its target industries require site
characteristics such as large parcel size, that are not available within the UGB. The City has to
meet its economic development objectives consistent with Metro Plan Policy B.1 it needs large
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 36
sites. The proposed code provisions are necessary to reserve large employment sites and to
prevent interim land uses that may preclude use of land for its intended purpose.
The CIBL/EOA identifies the attributes of industries that Springfield needs to attract, such as,
high-wage, stable jobs with benefits; jobs requiring skilled and unskilled labor; employers in a
range of industries that will contribute to a diverse economy; and industries that are compatible
with Springfield’s community values.” The CIBL/EOA identifies the characteristics of Springfield
that will affect the types of firms that need to locate in the City, such as, the City’s proximity to I-
5, high quality of life, proximity to the University of Oregon, the presence of the RiverBend
campus, positive business climate, availability of skilled and semi-skilled labor, and proximity to
indoor and outdoor recreational opportunities.
The CIBL/EOA discusses how sites may be utilized. E.g., for one firm or an industrial park, to
provide space for multiple, smaller firms.
The CIBL/EOA discusses pollution and efficient energy use.
The CIBL/EOA discusses the following types of firms that need to be attracted to Springfield;
Medical Services (medical firms, medical research firms, and other professional services);
Services for Seniors (health services that provide services to older people, such as assisted living
facilities or retirement centers); Small Scale Manufacturing (manufacturers of: medical
equipment, high-tech electronics, recreational equipment, furniture manufacturing, specialty
apparel, and other specialty manufacturing); Call Centers; Back-Office Functions (including
administrative functions, such as accounting or information technology); Tourism Industries
such as food services and accommodations); Specialty Food Processing (including those firms
that specialize in organic or natural foods or wineries); High-Tech (firms that range from high-
tech manufacturing to data centers to software development); Professional and Technical
Services (Engineering, research, medical-related professionals, and other professional services);
Green Businesses (green construction firms, organic food processing, sustainable logging and/or
lumber products manufacturing, or alternative energy production); Corporate Headquarters;
and Services for Residents (retail and government services, especially education).
Finally, the CIBL/EOA discusses Springfield’s need for employment land with characteristics that
cannot be found within the existing UGB.
The proposed interim AG Zoning District and the UHA-E land use designation are local controls
that encourage the retention of and protection of large parcels or consolidation of small parcels
of future employment land. Specifically, proposed SDC Subsection 3.2-905 states:
“A. The AG District is applied concurrently with the Urban Holding Area – Employment
(UHA-E) Metro Plan/”Springfield Refinement Plan” land use designation at the time of
a Springfield Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion.
B. The AG District preserves 20 acre or larger newly urbanizable lands for future
Employment use until land is converted to urban development in accordance with
Oregon Administrative Rule 660-024-0050(6).
Attachment 1, Page 6 of 36
C. In order to preserve the large tracts of undeveloped or underdeveloped newly
urbanizable lands, Subdivisions and Partitions, and Property Line Adjustments in the
AG District that reduce tracts of land below 20 acres in size shall be prohibited until
after Annexation to Springfield.”
Conclusion:
The CIBL/EOA shows a need to expand the UGB for employment land needs. The proposed AG
Zoning District will preserve and protect newly urbanized lands designated UHA-E for future
employment use until annexation can occur.
Findings:
METRO PLAN: C. Environmental Resource Element
Policies
“C.8. Local governments shall develop plans and programs which carefully manage
development on hillsides and in water bodies, and restrict development in wetlands in
order to protect the scenic quality, surface water and groundwater quality, forest
values, vegetation, and wildlife values of those areas”. (P. III-C-9)
Lands that will be subject to the proposed zoning will be subject to Springfield’s existing
development procedures regarding hillside development; water bodies (SDC 3.3-400 Floodplain
Overlay District); and wetlands/riparian areas (SDC 4.110 Stormwater Management, 4.115
Water Quality Protection and 4.117 Natural Resource Protection Areas).
The proposed zoning does not alter or affect Springfield’s adopted provisions regulating
development to protect natural resources as discussed in staff’s response to Goal 5.
Lands that will be subject to the proposed zoning will be subject to Springfield 2030 Refinement
Plan Urbanization policies that require demonstration of Goals compliance prior to designation
and zoning of land to permit urban development.
“C.19 Agricultural production shall be considered an acceptable interim and temporary use
on urbanizable land and on vacant and underdeveloped urban land where no conflicts
with adjacent urban uses exist. “
The proposed AG Zoning District, specifically SDC 3.2 -915 lists proposed “farm uses" that are
currently permitted under Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 308A.056(1) within EFU Zoning
Districts. These proposed permitted uses are intended to be interim until the property is
annexed to Springfield and can be developed for employment uses.
Conclusion:
The proposed AG Zoning District preserves newly urbanized lands designated UHA-E for future
employment use until annexation can occur. The proposed AG Zoning District does not alter or
affect Springfield’s adopted provisions regulating development to protect natural resources as
discussed in staff’s response to Goal 5. Future planning to update the Goal 5 inventories, if
Attachment 1, Page 7 of 36
necessary, will be a required as newly urbanizable sites are designated and zoned to permit
urban uses.
Findings:
METRO PLAN: D. Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element
Policies
“D.2 Land use regulations and acquisition programs along river corridors and waterways
shall take into account all the concerns and needs of the community, including
recreation, resource, and wildlife protection; enhancement of river corridor and
waterway environments; potential for supporting nonautomobile transportation;
opportunities for residential development; and other compatible uses”. (Page III-D-4)
“D.3 Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County shall continue to cooperate in expanding water
related parks and other facilities, where appropriate, that allow access to and
enjoyment of river and waterway corridors.” (Page III-D-4)
“D.5 New development that locates along river corridors and waterways shall be limited to
uses that are compatible with the natural, scenic, and environmental qualities of those
water features.” (Page III-D-4)
“D.6 New industrial development that locates along the Willamette and McKenzie Rivers
shall enhance natural, scenic, and environmental qualities.” (Page III-D-4)
“D.8 Within the framework of mandatory statewide planning goals, local Willamette River
Greenway plans shall allow a variety of means for public enjoyment of the river,
including public acquisition areas, residential areas, and commercial areas.” (Page
III-D-4)
“D.9 Local and state governments shall continue to provide adequate public access to the
Willamette River Greenway.” (Page III-D-5)
The proposed South Millrace UGB expansion area includes approximately 260 acres of land
along the Middle Fork of the Willamette River within the Willamette Greenway that is currently
owned by the following public agencies: Springfield; SUB; and WPRD. As part of the proposed
UGB expansion, these lands are intended to be designated Public and Semi-Public (POS) to be
rezoned to Springfield’s PLO Zoning District. Other properties in the proposed South Millrace
UGB expansion area are proposed to receive the UHA-E land use designation and AG zoning.
SDC 3.3-300 Willamette Greenway Overlay District Standards will apply at the time of
development. The proposed SDC amendments do not affect or alter these provisions.
Conclusion:
Issues regarding the Willamette Greenway will be addressed when development occurs.
Findings:
METRO PLAN: G. Public Facilities and Services Element
“G.1 Extend the minimum level and full range of key urban facilities and services in an
orderly and efficient manner consistent with the growth management policies in
Chapter II-C, relevant policies in this chapter, and other Metro Plan policies.” (Page
III-G-4)
Attachment 1, Page 8 of 36
The Metro Plan defines the minimum level of key urban facilities and services as: wastewater
service; stormwater service; transportation; solid waste management; water service; fire and
emergency medical services; police protection; citywide park and recreation programs; electric
service; land use controls; communication facilities; and public schools on a district-wide basis
(in other words, not necessarily within walking distance of all students served). The Metro Plan
defines a full range of key urban facilities and services as the minimum level plus urban public
transit, natural gas, street lighting, libraries, local parks, local recreation facilities and services,
and health service.
Extension of the minimum level and full range of key urban facilities and services has been
addressed in staff’s response to the Metro Plan Growth Management Goals, Findings, and
Policies discussed above. Compliance with this policy will occur at the time of annexation to
Springfield prior to development.
Conclusion:
The proposed AG Zoning District will preserve newly urbanized lands designated UHA-E for
future employment use until the PFSP is updated.
The proposed PLO Zoning District amendment will add uses necessary to allow SUB to provide
electric and water service, and the WPRD recreational facilities to serve land within the
Springfield UGB.
Findings:
METRO PLAN: H. Parks and Recreation Facilities Element
“H.2 Local parks and recreation plans and analyses shall be prepared by each jurisdiction
and coordinated on a metropolitan level. The park standards adopted by the
applicable city and incorporated into the city’s development code shall be used in local
development processes.” (Page III-H-4)
WPRD is the local agency that provides parks for Springfield. The 2012 WPRD Comprehensive
Plan Map 2 lists proposed park and recreation projects. In the proposed South Millrace UGB
expansion area, the following park projects are proposed: establishing Georgia Pacific Park as a
natural area; establishing Clearwater Park as a special use park; completion of the Middle Fork
multi-use path; and construction of the Millrace multi-use path. The proposed UGB expansion
will also include the following WPRD properties in north Springfield; the Oxbow; Lively Park; and
Ruff Park.
The proposed UGB expansion provides a significant opportunity to meet the parkland need for
existing and future residents and workers in Springfield, as well as the public at large.
Conclusion:
The proposed PLO Zoning District amendment will add the types of recreational uses cited
above to the permitted use list.
Attachment 1, Page 9 of 36
Findings:
METRO PLAN: K. Citizen Involvement Element
See staff’s response to Goal 1 below.
Conclusion:
The citizen involvement requirements have been met.
Findings:
THE SPRINGFIELD 2030 REFINEMENT PLAN - GENERAL
The proposed SDC amendments will be adopted concurrently with the Springfield 2030
Refinement Plan Economic and Urbanization Elements to implement Springfield 2030
Refinement Plan Economic and Urbanization Elements policies. The Springfield 2030
Refinement Plan (a refinement of the Metro Plan) is intended to be adopted as part of the
proposed UGB expansion applications in early 2014. For this reason, applicable policies and
implementation strategies of the Economic and Urbanization Elements will be used to support
the proposed SDC amendments.
THE SPRINGFIELD 2030 REFINEMENT PLAN - ECONOMIC ELEMENT
The proposed Economic Element identifies Springfield’s land use policies and implementation
strategies to support industrial and other employment 1 development opportunities in the
community for the planning period 2010-2030, to demonstrate compliance with Statewide
Planning Goal 9. Springfield completed a Commercial and Industrial Buildable Land Inventory
and Economic Opportunities Analysis to update the community’s economic patterns,
potentialities, strengths and deficiencies as they relate to state and national trends. The work
product of the study - the CIBL/EOA prepared by ECONorthwest — will be adopted as the
Technical Supplement to the Economic Element. Springfield’s CIBL/EOA includes an inventory of
buildable commercial and industrial land in Springfield, an analysis of national, state, regional,
and county trends; a 20-year employment forecast that leads to identification of needed
development sites; and a description of the types of sites that are needed to accommodate
industries that are likely to locate or expand in Springfield.
Adoption of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element as an amendment of the
Metro Plan will fulfill Springfield’s obligation to amend the comprehensive plan to provide an
economic opportunities analysis [Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-009-0015]
OAR 660-009-0025 Designation of Lands for Industrial and Commercial Uses requires
1 As defined in Oregon Administrative Rule 660-009-0005: "Other Employment Use" means all non-
industrial employment activities including the widest range of retail, wholesale, service, non-profit,
business headquarters, administrative and governmental employment activities that are accommodated
in retail, office and flexible building types. Other employment uses also include employment activities of
an entity or organization that serves the medical, educational, social service, recreation and security
needs of the community typically in large buildings or multi-building campuses.
Attachment 1, Page 10 of 36
Springfield to adopt measures to implement policies adopted pursuant to OAR 660-009-0020.
Appropriate implementation measures include amendments to plan and zone
map designations, land use regulations, public facility plans, and transportation system plans.
More specifically, plans must identify the approximate number, acreage and characteristics of
sites needed to accommodate industrial and other employment uses to implement plan policies,
and must designate serviceable land suitable to meet identified site needs. The CIBL/EOA
identifies required site types reasonably expected to be needed to accommodate the expected
employment growth, based on the site characteristics typical of expected uses [OAR 660-0090-
0015 (2)]. 2
Springfield’s adoption of the CIBL/EOA and UGB expansion will amend the Metro Plan to include
an inventory of vacant and developed lands within the planning areas designated for industrial
or other employment use [OAR 660-009-0015(3). The CIBL/EOA describes the site characteristics
of vacant or developed sites within each plan or zoning district [OAR 660-009-0015(3)(a)(A)] and
identifies development constraints or infrastructure needs that affect the buildable area of sites
in the inventory [OAR 660-009-0015(3)(a)(B)].
Part of Springfield’s economic strategy, as described in the proposed CIBL/EOA and in Economic
Element policy E.1 and Implementation Strategy 1.1, is to provide a diversity of employment
sites, including large sites.
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element Policy E.1:
“Plan and zone sufficient land to support the creation of 13,440 new jobs between 2010 and
2030 within Springfield’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by bringing new land into the UGB to
provide Employment Opportunity Areas and by adopting plan designations, policies and
implementation actions to support infill, redevelopment, mixed-use zoning and the growth of
home-based employment occurring in non-employment zones, as identified in the Springfield
Economic Opportunities Analysis”. (Data source: Economic Opportunities Analysis 2013)
(emphasis added)
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element Implementation Strategy 1.1:
“Amend the UGB, Metro Plan diagram and text to add 6253 acres of suitable “Employment
Opportunity Areas (EOA)” to provide land for employers requiring sites larger than 20 acres
and preserve the suitable sites for future development by creating and applying an “Urban
Holding Area - Employment Opportunity Area” (UHA – EOA) designation and holding zone to
the sites as described in the Urbanization Element and Springfield Development Code.” (Data
source: Economic Opportunities Analysis 2013) (emphasis added)4
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element Policy E.2:
2 ECONorthwest, Springfield Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands Inventory and Economic
Opportunities Analysis, 2013. 3 The exact number of acres will be determined through the public process leading up to adoption of this
draft policy. EOA land need is 640. Retail shopping center 15 acres was deducted from the UGB expansion
total acres re Policy E.21. 4 Wording of this policy to be finalized in the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element
adoption ordinance
Attachment 1, Page 11 of 36
“Establish minimum parcel sizes within the “Urban Holding Area - Employment ” (UHA – E)
designation of 20 acres or larger5 to reserve suitable large parcels”. (Data source: Economic
Opportunities Analysis 2013)
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element Policy E.3:
“Work with property owners and their representatives to ensure that prime development and
redevelopment sites throughout Springfield and its Urban Growth Boundary that are
designated for employment use are preserved for future employment needs and are not
subdivided or used for non-employment uses.”
Availability of sites 20 acres and larger is important for attracting or growing large businesses,
which are often traded-sector businesses. If Springfield does not have these large sites, there is
little chance that the City will attract these types of businesses.
Springfield is proposing to amend the UGB in early 2014 to include 86 sites 20 acres and larger to
meet the needs of target industry employers that require large sites.
Through its adoption of the Economic Element and UGB Amendment, Springfield is establishing
prime industrial land pursuant to OAR 660-009-0020(6) and OAR 660-009-0025(8)and has
identified and inventoried the land supply as required under OAR 660-009-0015(3)(C)(c).
“OAR 660-009-0025(8) Uses with Special Siting Characteristics. Cities and counties that adopt
objectives or policies providing for uses with special site needs must adopt policies and land
use regulations providing for those special site needs. Special site needs include, but are not
limited to large acreage sites, special site configurations, direct access to transportation
facilities, prime industrial lands, sensitivity to adjacent land uses…Policies and land use
regulations for these uses must:
Identify sites suitable for the proposed use;
Protect sites suitable for the proposed use by limiting land divisions and permissible uses and
activities that interfere with development of the site for the intended use; and
Where necessary, protect a site for the intended use by including measures that either
prevent or appropriately restrict incompatible uses on adjacent or nearby lands.” (emphasis
added)
Springfield is obligated to protect lands added to the UGB for their capacity to accommodate
intended employment uses. To preserve large sites added to the UGB for their intended
purpose, the proposed zoning must limit land divisions. The current Agriculture designation and
5 The exact minimum parcel size(s) will be determined through the public process leading up to adoption
of this draft policy and may vary from 20 to 50 acres. Minimums will be adjusted to fit particular sites
selected, e.g. if 100 ac site, 50 acre site, 25 acre site, etc.
6 The number of sites and acres of land will be determined through the public review process beginning in
February 2014.
Attachment 1, Page 12 of 36
EFU 25 and EFU 30 zoning already limits land division. The proposed AG Zoning District prohibits
land divisions until the property is annexed to Springfield and development approval has been
granted.
To preserve large sites added to the UGB for their intended purpose, the proposed zoning must
also limit permissible uses and activities to those that do not interfere with development of the
site for the future employment use. The current Metro Plan and Lane Rural Comprehensive Plan
Agriculture designation and Lane County EFU zoning allow uses and activities that could
potentially interfere with development of these sites for the intended employment uses, such as
churches, public/private schools and airports. The proposed AG Zoning District allows only those
farm uses defined in ORS 308A.056(1), prohibits uses and activities that interfere with
development of the site for the intended employment use, but allows existing uses not on the
proposed use list to continue as pre-existing non-conforming uses.
Conclusion:
Staff has demonstrated that the proposed AG Zoning District complies with the applicable
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic Element.
THE SPRINGFIELD 2030 REFINEMENT PLAN - URBANIZATION ELEMENT7
Findings:
The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element is the City’s first comprehensive
plan policy document to guide urbanization of land solely within Springfield’s Urban Growth
Boundary. Since acknowledgement of the Metro Plan in 1982, through the 2004 Periodic review
and update of the Plan, and until acknowledgement of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Urbanization Element by LCDC, the acknowledged plan and policies controlling urbanization in
Springfield are contained in the Metro Plan.
The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element is a work in progress that will be
refined and completed after the City and Lane County conduct a public hearing in 2014 and after
decisions are made regarding which specific sites will be included in the expanded UGB. Staff
cites applicable draft policies here to demonstrate how the proposed zoning implements those
policies. Revisions to the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element made
subsequent to the preparation of this report and during the public adoption phase are likely to
necessitate revision to the findings contained herein.
The Policies and Implementation Actions in the Urbanization Element address
“Urbanizable and Newly Urbanizable Lands”
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element Policy:
7 At the time this staff report was prepared, the draft Urbanization Element policies cited here were being
reformatted and re-numbered.
Attachment 1, Page 13 of 36
“The Springfield Urban Growth Boundary shall consist of (a) the area of the currently
acknowledged Metropolitan Urban Growth Area that is east of Interstate 5 and (b)
additional "newly urbanizable lands" east of Interstate 5 [the UGB expansion areas]
reasonably necessary to provide 20-year supplies of land for residential, commercial,
industrial and other employment uses consistent with applicable state land use
statutes, goals, and rules. Such "newly urbanizable lands" shall be selected in
accordance with ORS 197.298, LCDC Goal 14, and LCDC's Urban Growth Boundary Rule,
OAR Chapter 660, Division 24.”
The Metro Plan defines “urbanizable land” as follows:
“Urbanizable land: Urbanizable lands are those unincorporated lands between
the city limits and the UGB.”
(Metro Plan V-7)
The proposed zoning will be applicable to newly urbanizable lands designated UHA-E in the
Metro Plan.
Lands proposed to be designated UHA-E Springfield were identified through the City’s UGB
Location Alternatives Analysis to identify buildable, suitable sites to accommodate the proposed
employment uses. The proposed UGB expansion areas listed below have been determined 8to
be the most suitable large employment sites employers in Springfield’s vicinity that require large
sites:
North Gateway
South Millrace; and
Mahogany Lane/South Jasper
The proposed UGB expansion areas dedicated to employment uses may change but will be
finalized during the public hearing process to begin in early 2014.
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element Policy:
“Urbanizable lands within the 2030 UGB that are within the existing acknowledged
UGB shall be converted to urban uses as provided in the Metro Plan and as more
particularly described in the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan and applicable
neighborhood refinement plans.”
The proposed zoning will be applicable only to newly urbanizable lands designated UHA-E in the
Metro Plan and added to the Springfield UGB as part of the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment
proposal. Other urbanizable land with an LDR plan designation and within Springfield’s UF-10
zoning district is not subject to the proposed zoning. This policy has been addressed in the
Metro Plan Growth Management, Goals, Findings and Policies; and the Public Facilities and
Services portions of this staff report.
8 Through the City’s Urban Growth Boundary Location Alternatives Analysis
Attachment 1, Page 14 of 36
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element Policy:
“Urban Holding Area (UHA) Interim Plan Designation”
“Urbanizable lands added to Springfield’s acknowledged UGB by Ordinance X, date Y
shall be identified as "newly urbanizable lands" and shall be designated “Urban
Holding Area- Employment ” (UHA-E) consistent with the employment site needs
criteria for their inclusion in the UGB.9 The Metro Plan diagram assigns the UHA-E
designation to newly urbanizable lands as an interim plan designation that allows only
those uses permitted by the AG zoning. In addition, land divisions creating parcels
smaller than 20 acres shall not be permitted unless included as an element of a Master
Plan submitted in conformance with the provisions of Policy X below and the
requirements of Chapter 5, Section 5.13-100 to 5.13-140 Master Plans, of the
Springfield Development Code. The transportation planning rule requirements under
OAR 660-012-0060 shall be addressed prior to any redesignation that allows
urbanization. “
Areas designated URBAN HOLDING AREA - EMPLOYMENT (UHA- E) shall not be re-
designated or zoned to permit development of big box retail or other regional retail
commercial uses.
The UHA-E land use designation will be established as part of the Springfield 2030 Refinement
Plan Metro Plan amendment. The proposed AG Zoning District while allowing “farm use” as a
permitted interim use, it does limit those uses currently permitted under the existing Lane
County EFU zoning, such as churches, public/private schools and airports, thus generating fewer
vehicular trips than allowed prior to inclusion in Springfield’s UGB. In addition, as specified in
OAR 660-024-0020(1)(d), the transportation planning rule requirements under OAR 660-012-
0060 are not required to be applied to a UGB expansion (see also staff’s response to Goal 12).
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element Policies:
“Urban Holding Areas – plan amendment (PAPA) process required to replace UHA-E
designation with final Employment designation and zoning for urban development”
“Newly urbanizable land added to the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary is
designated URBAN HOLDING AREA (UHA-E) on the Metro Plan diagram.”
“The URBAN HOLDING AREA plan designation shall be replaced after adoption of a
Type II City-initiated refinement, neighborhood or district plan or after adoption of a
property owner initiated Type IV plan amendment that establishes plan designations
9 Employment site needs are explained in the Economic Element of this Plan, and in the Springfield
Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands Inventory and Economic Opportunities Analysis.
Attachment 1, Page 15 of 36
and demonstrates consistency with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and the
requirements of ORS 197.610-6505.”
“Land identified as URBAN HOLDING AREA – Employment (UHA-E) in the Springfield
2030 Plan Diagram shall be designated to establish locations for needed employment
sites as identified in the Springfield Economic Opportunities Analysis, consistent with
the Springfield Economic Element. “
URBAN HOLDING AREA – Employment (UHA-E) sites containing 20 acres or more of
buildable unconstrained land shall be designated and zoned for Employment ,
Employment Mixed Use , Industrial, Light Medium Industrial, Campus Industrial uses.
Portions of UHA-E sites with absolute development constraints may be designated
Parks and Open Space or Natural Resource.
“Limit land division on employment land parcels 20 acres and larger to ensure that
large parcels of land are available for businesses that need large parcels.”
“Land in areas designated URBAN HOLDING AREA - EMPLOYMENT (UHA-E) shall be
designated to provide an adequate supply of development sites to accommodate
anticipated employment growth with the public and private services, sizes, zoning,
and other characteristics needed by firms likely to locate in Springfield. These sites
shall be protected from development by uses incompatible to the intended purpose of
the site’s inclusion within the urban growth boundary through land use prohibitions
contained in the AG interim zoning district. “
“Sites over 20-acres in areas designated URBAN HOLDING AREA - EMPLOYMENT (UHA-
E) shall be preserved for special developments and industries that require large sites….
Springfield’s CIBL/EOA identifies characteristics of Springfield’s needed employment land sites,
including site size and compatibility of adjacent uses. One purpose of the proposed AG Zoning
District is to preserve larger tracts of future employment lands. The proposed AG Zoning District
accomplishes this purpose by establishing a minimum development area (20 acres) and
prohibiting land divisions and property line adjustments until annexation to Springfield occurs.
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element Policies:
Continue to allow and encourage urban farms as interim uses in the city and its
urbanizable area, and address land use compatibility issues as they arise to ensure
that interim agriculture uses within the City limits are a positive contribution to
adjacent residential neighborhoods.
Retain “Agriculture” zoning for newly urbanizable lands until lands are designated and
zoned for employment uses and annexed into the City.
Conclusion:
Staff has demonstrated that the proposed AG Zoning District complies with the applicable
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Urbanization Element.
Attachment 1, Page 16 of 36
CRITERION: SDC 5.6-115A.2. Applicable State Statutes; and
Findings:
ORS 197.610 applies to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)
notification as required as part of post acknowledgement procedures (amendment of the SDC).
Springfield sent notice for the proposed SDC amendments via e-mail to DLCD on November 13,
2013, 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing (before the Planning Commission) scheduled
for December 18, 2013. The notice included the proposed SDC amendments with commentary
See also staff’s response to Statewide planning Goal 1).
ORS 308A.056(1) contains a list of “farm uses” permitted in EFU Zoning Districts that are listed
in the proposed AG Zoning District.
Conclusion:
Staff has demonstrated that the proposed SDC amendments comply with the applicable State
Statutes.
CRITERION: SDC 5.6-115A.3. Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules.
Note: Additional OARs are addressed under criterion 5.6-115A.1.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 1 CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
“To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be
involved in all phases of the planning process.”
Findings:
Springfield and Lane County have DLCD acknowledged land use codes that are intended to serve
as the principal implementing ordinances for the Metro Plan.
The proposed SDC amendments establishing the AG Zoning District and updating the PLO Zoning
District use list are a Type IV legislative action involving the creation, revision or large-scale
implementation of public policy. DLCD acknowledged Springfield’s adopted Citizen Involvement
Program (CIP) in 1990. In this program, the Springfield Planning Commission is the Committee
for Citizen Involvement (CCI). Input on Springfield’s proposed economic development objectives
and strategies was received from citizens, stakeholder groups, commissions and elected officials
through a citizen involvement process that included a CIBL/EOA Stakeholder Committee,
approved by the CCI, online public survey, visioning workshops, work sessions, open houses and
public hearings conducted between 2008 and 2013.
SDC Section 5.1-140B. requires:
A “Notice of Proposed Amendment” to the Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD) 35 days in advance of the first evidentiary hearing. Notice was mailed
on November 19, 2013.
A newspaper notice of the public hearing. The newspaper notice was published on
December 6, 2013 in the Register Guard.
Attachment 1, Page 17 of 36
Scheduled public meetings:
On November 19, 2013, the Springfield Planning Commission held a work session to discuss
the proposed SDC amendments. The Springfield Planning Commission discussed proposed
SDC amendments and gave staff direction to proceed with the scheduled public hearing .
On December 3, 2013, the Planning Commission held the first evidentiary public hearing on
the proposed SDC amendments.
Public hearings before the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of
Commissioners are scheduled in early 2014 and the proposed SDC amendments will be
made part of the UGB expansion applications; these public hearings will require separate
public notice prior to those hearings.
Conclusion:
Requirements under Goal 1 are met by adherence to the citizen involvement processes required
by the Metro Plan and implemented by SDC Section 5.1-140B.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 2 LAND USE PLANNING
“To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and
actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and
actions”
Findings:
Goal 2 requires that local comprehensive plans be consistent with Statewide Planning Goals and
that implementing ordinances be consistent with acknowledged comprehensive plans. The
Metro Plan is the policy document (local comprehensive plan10) that provides a basis for all
decisions and actions related to land use in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area, and for
Springfield in particular. The Metro Plan was acknowledged by DLCD on August 23, 1982 to be in
compliance with Statewide Planning Goals in accordance with ORS 197.245 and 197.250. In all
cases, the Metro Plan is the guiding document, and refinement plans must be consistent with
the Metro Plan. The SDC also implements the policies and direction of the Metro Plan and
adopted refinement plans (the proposed Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan, the proposed
CIBL/EOA among others) and specifies the procedures and criteria that are necessary for
development approval. In this case, the proposed SDC amendments are being reviewed by the
10 Comprehensive plan” means a generalized, coordinated land use map and policy statement of the governing body
of a local government that interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to the use of lands,
including but not limited to sewer and water systems, transportation systems, educational facilities, recreational
facilities, and natural resources and air and water quality management programs. “Comprehensive” means all-
inclusive, both in terms of the geographic area covered and functional and natural activities and systems occurring in
the area covered by the plan. “General nature” means a summary of policies and proposals in broad categories and
does not necessarily indicate specific locations of any area, activity or use. A plan is “coordinated” when the needs of
all levels of governments, semipublic and private agencies and the citizens of Oregon have been considered and
accommodated as much as possible. “Land” includes water, both surface and subsurface, and the air. (Ref. ORS
197.015(5)
Attachment 1, Page 18 of 36
Springfield Planning Commission11, prior to adoption as a larger package of proposed
amendments to expand Springfield’s UGB.
Goal 2 also requires that land use decisions be coordinated with affected jurisdictions and that
they be supported by an adequate factual base. Springfield, Eugene and Lane County have
continuously coordinated the Metro Plan partner jurisdictions’ response to HB 3337. Now that
Springfield has its own UGB and adopted RLHNA, the proposed SDC amendments along with the
applications that are part of the proposed UGB expansion package require public hearings and
adoption by both the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners. The
two jurisdictions must coordinate to adopt similar Ordinances. There are no Federal agencies
that require notice for the proposed SDC amendments, however, notice has been mailed to
DLCD (see Staff’s response to Goal 1). Springfield reached out to and worked with the WPRD and
SUB regarding the proposed amendment of the PLO Zoning District.
Goal 2 provides procedures for Statewide Goal exceptions. An exception is a decision to exclude
certain land from the requirements of one or more applicable Statewide Planning Goals.
However, there are no Statewide Planning Goal exceptions requested for the proposed SDC
amendments.
Conclusion:
The Goal 2 coordination requirement is met when Springfield engages in an exchange, or invites
such an exchange, between the City and any affected governmental unit as discussed above.
There are no Goal 2 exceptions required for these amendments. Therefore, the proposed SDC
amendments are consistent with Goal 2.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 3 AGRICULTURAL LAND
“To preserve and maintain agricultural lands.”
Findings:
Goal 3 defines "agricultural lands" by stating, in part, that they: “…do not include land within
acknowledged urban growth boundaries….”
The majority of the proposed UGB expansion areas currently have a Metro Plan designation of
Agriculture and Lane County zoning of EFU. As part of the proposed UGB expansion process,
these agricultural lands are intended to be designated UHA-E and zoned AG. The AG Zoning
District will not be in effect until the UHA-E land use designation is legislatively approved. The
proposed SDC amendments do not in themselves affect “preserving and maintaining
agricultural lands” under Goal 3.
11 Lane County delegated its Planning Commission authority to the Springfield Planning Commission for land use
matters within the Springfield UGB. Specifically, Article IV Section A(3) of the 1986 IGA between Lane County and
Springfield states: “The County shall, as of January 1, 1987: Transfer to the Springfield Planning Commission the
legislative land use authority for the urbanizable portion of the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary currently
exercised by the Lane County Planning Commission.” Given this authority and due to the County’s limited resources,
the Springfield Planning Commission will act on behalf of Springfield and Lane County for matters associated with the
proposed SDC amendments.
.
Attachment 1, Page 19 of 36
Conclusion:
Goal 3 is does not apply to the proposed SDC amendments because no plan designation change
is occurring at this time. The Lane County Agricultural land use designation and EFU zoning is
intended to be changed to Springfield’s UHA-E land use designation and AG zoning for those
applicable properties by additional public hearings.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 4 FOREST LAND
“To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state's forest
economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous
growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the leading use on forest land consistent with
sound management of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for
recreational opportunities and agriculture.”
Findings:
OAR 660-006-0020 states: “Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and
therefore, the designation of forest lands is not required.”
The proposed SDC amendments apply to property located completely within Springfield’s
acknowledged UGB, both in and outside of the city limits. All land in Springfield’s UGB has City
zoning. Springfield has the authority to apply its zoning between the city limits and UGB through
an Intergovernmental Agreement signed with Lane County in 1986. There are no forest lands
within the proposed UGB expansion areas. No UGB expansion is proposed as part of these
proposed SDC amendments. However, land within the proposed UGB expansion areas will be
zoned AG and designated UHA-E when legislatively approved by the Springfield City Council and
Land Bard of County Commissioners in early 2014. These proposed SDC amendments do not
affect land designated for forest use outside of Springfield’s UGB. Therefore, as specified in OAR
660-006-20, Goal 4 does not apply.
Conclusion:
The proposed SDC amendments do not affect land designated for forest use outside of
Springfield’s UGB and therefore, does not apply.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 NATURAL RESOURCES, SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS, AND
OPEN SPACE
“To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces.”
Findings:
Goal 5 requires communities to inventory the following natural resources: Riparian corridors,
including Water and Riparian Areas and Fish Habitat; Wetlands; Wildlife Habitat; Federal Wild
and Scenic Rivers; State Scenic Waterways; Groundwater Resources; Approved Oregon
Recreation Trails; Natural Areas; Wilderness Areas; Mineral and Aggregate Resources; Energy
Sources; and Cultural Areas.
Goal 5 encourages communities to maintain existing inventories of the following resources:
Historic Resources; Open Space; and Scenic Views and Sites.
Below is a partial list of adopted natural resource protection measures:
Attachment 1, Page 20 of 36
1998 - The Springfield Local Wetland Inventory *(LWI) which lists all known Springfield
wetlands, states criteria to identify which ones are “locally significant.”
2002 – Implementation of the City’s Stormwater Management Program by amending the
SDC to address the protection and enhancement of river corridor and waterway
environments for endangered fish and water quality under Goal 6 in order to comply with
the Federal Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act.
The SDC amendment established 50 and 75 foot protection setbacks along Water Quality
Limited Watercourses. No changes are proposed to riparian corridor standards contained in
the SDC as part of the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project.
2004 - The Springfield Inventory of Natural Resource Sites (SINRS) which listed riparian areas
and applied local criteria for identifying locally significant riparian sites. In the adopting
ordinance for the NRS Inventory, the Wetland Inventory was incorporated into the NRS
Inventory.
2005 - The Springfield Natural Resources Study (NRS)12 which addresses the protection of
locally significant wetland and riparian resources that were adopted as part of the LWI and
the SNRI. The NRS presented the analysis required by Goal 5 to make decisions about how
to protect Springfield’s wetlands and riparian resources. The NRS established 25-foot
development setbacks from inventoried wetlands and riparian resource sites that were not
already protected by stormwater policies. The 50 and 75 foot protection setbacks
established by the Stormwater Quality Management Program were retained.
2009 - The Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) was contracted to coordinate the
completion of a new wetland and riparian inventory for all of Glenwood in preparation for
the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update project.
2010 – LCOG and the consulting firm, Pacific Habitat Services, completed the inventory work
for all of Glenwood in February 2010. Three new riparian sites in were added to the NRI;
and updated information for existing Glenwood wetland and riparian sites were adopted in
February 2011 (LRP2010-00002). There were no changes to the established NRS setbacks
discussed above and they apply to the new wetlands and riparian area modifications.
Compliance with OAR 660-016-0005 and 660-023-0040 Economic, Social, Environmental and
Energy (ESEE) consequences and the amount of inventoried vacant land affected by the
additional wetlands and riparian modifications were addressed in the staff report in the
above referenced application. In order for Springfield to incorporate the identified riparian
areas identified into the City’s existing Natural Resource Inventory (NRI), it was determined
that an additional wildlife assessment was required. This assessment was prepared and
adopted concurrently with the updated NRI.
Land currently within Springfield’s UGB complies with Goal 5 and the applicable OARs:
660-023-090 Riparian Corridors; 660-023-0100 Wetlands; 660-023-0140 Groundwater
Resources; OAR 660-023-0210 Wildlife Habitat; 660-023-200 Historic Resources; 660-023-0220
Open Space; and 660-023-0230 Scenic Views and Sites.
However, the intent of the proposed SDC amendments is to establish the AG Zoning District and
amend the current PLO Zoning District. No changes to supporting ordinances or policy
12 The NR Study, LWI and the NRS Inventory are Springfield-specific refinement plans that supplement the
Metro Plan.
Attachment 1, Page 21 of 36
documents adopted to comply with Goal 5 are affected by the proposed SDC amendments and
they do not repeal, replace or void existing Metro Plan policy or SDC regulations with respect to
any identified natural resources.
Nonetheless, regarding the proposed SDC amendments, 660-023-0250 Applicability must be
discussed:
“(3) Local governments are not required to apply Goal 5 in consideration of a PAPA unless the
PAPA affects a Goal 5 resource. For purposes of this section, a PAPA would affect a Goal 5
resource only if:
(a) The PAPA creates or amends a resource list or a portion of an acknowledged plan or land
use regulation adopted in order to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific
requirements of Goal 5;
(b) The PAPA allows new uses that could be conflicting uses with a particular significant Goal 5
resource site on an acknowledged resource list; or
(c) The PAPA amends an acknowledged UGB and factual information is submitted
demonstrating that a resource site, or the impact areas of such a site, is included in the
amended UGB area.”
The proposed SDC amendments at the Springfield Planning Commission level do not include a
PAPA to amend the Metro Plan. At this time, staff is only recommending that the Planning
Commission forward a recommendation of approval of the SDC amendments to establish the
proposed AG Zoning District and amend the PLO Zoning District to the Springfield City Council
and the Lane County Board of Commissioners. A PAPA will be required as part of the UGB
expansion applications and Goal 5 and applicable OARs under 660-023 will be addressed, if
necessary, at that time. Additionally, the application of Goal 5 and applicable OARs under 660-
023 in order to update existing inventories required by the goal in the proposed UGB expansion
areas will be necessitated at the time annexation occurs to Springfield and development is
proposed.
Conclusion:
Springfield currently has provisions regulating the protection of natural resources, scenic and
historic areas, and open space specified above. However, Goal 5 does not apply to the proposed
SDC amendments because they themselves do not expand the UGB and no development is
proposed at this time.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 6 AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCES QUALITY
“To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state.”
Findings:
INTRODUCTION
Goal 6 is primarily concerned with compliance with Federal and State environmental quality
statutes and how this compliance is achieved as development proceeds in relationship to air
sheds, river basins and land resources. The proposed SDC amendments do not affect
Springfield’s ability to provide for clean air, water or land resource; the intent is to establish the
proposed AG Zoning District and amend the PLO Zoning District. At this time staff is only
recommending that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval of the
proposed SDC amendments to the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of
Attachment 1, Page 22 of 36
Commissioners. The application of Goal 6 in the proposed UGB expansion areas will be
addressed, if necessary, as part of the proposed UGB expansion applications (public hearings
begin in early 2014) and at the time annexation occurs and development is proposed. That said,
there are a number of Federal, State, regional and local regulations that are currently in effect:
FEDERAL REGULATIONS
There are four federal environmental quality acts relevant to Goal 6: the Clean Water, the Clean
Air, the Safe Drinking Water and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Acts13. These acts are
enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to maintain air, water, and land
resource quality.
STATE REGULATIONS
The EPA delegates authority to Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to enforce
federal environmental statutes in Oregon (i.e. the federal regulations listed above). The DEQ
administers the federal statutes through the OAR, ORS and DEQ programs. The OARs regulate
noise control, groundwater quality protection, solid waste, hazardous waste management,
ambient air quality standards, and transportation conformity. The ORSs provide procedures for
compliance with sewage treatment and disposal systems, solid waste management, reuse and
recycling, hazardous waste and hazardous materials, noise control, and air and water quality
standards.
REGIONAL REGULATIONS
Metro Plan
The Metro Plan contains policies related to Goal 6 that maintain air, water and land resource
quality in the metropolitan area that are discussed in detail under the Metro Plan Policy
discussion portion of this report.
Regional Transportation Plan/TransPlan
The Central Lane Metropolitan Planning Organization Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). This
plan is the federal Regional Transportation Plan for the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area.
TransPlan guides regional transportation system planning and development in the metropolitan
area.
The Lane Regional Air Pollution Agency (LRAPA) regulates regional air quality in Lane County
through regulations, programs and permits. When land use applications are submitted to
Springfield, the applicant must obtain any applicable air quality permits from LRAPA as a
condition of Site Plan Review approval.
13 The Clean Water Act establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants in the waters
of the United States. The Clean Air Act regulates air emissions from area, stationary, and mobile sources,
sets maximum pollutant standards and directs states to develop state implementation plans applicable to
appropriate industrial sources. The Safe Drinking Water Act protects drinking water and its sources (rivers,
lakes, reservoirs, springs and ground water) and sets standards for drinking water quality and oversees
the states, localities, and water suppliers who implement those standards. The Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act controls hazardous waste from the “cradle-to-grave”, which includes the generation,
transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste and sets forth a framework for the
management of non-hazardous wastes.
Attachment 1, Page 23 of 36
LOCAL REGULATIONS
The Springfield Public Works Department maintains water quality in Springfield through
metropolitan sewage and stormwater treatment systems that are required to operate under
specific guidelines set forth by the DEQ. Springfield also has design standards for wastewater
and stormwater collection systems in the Springfield Public Works, Standard Construction
Specifications and the Engineering Design Standards & Procedures Manual. In addition, as part
of the Stormwater Management Program, Springfield amended the SDC in 2002 to address the
protection and enhancement of river corridor and waterway environments (riparian/wetlands
areas) for endangered fish and water quality under Goal 6 in order to comply with the Federal
Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. The regulations
included measures required to maintain and improve water quality implementing Goal 6 and
responding to the applicable federal laws referenced above. In 2008, Springfield adopted its
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Implementation Plan, which describes strategies Springfield
will implement to reduce temperature, bacteria, and mercury pollution in the Willamette and
McKenzie Rivers. This plan was required to comply with the Willamette Basin TMDL order to
help meet pollutant load allocations for the Upper Willamette sub-basin as approved by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency in September 2006.
Conclusion:
Springfield currently has provisions regulating air, water and land resources specified above.
However, Goal 6 does not apply to the proposed SDC amendments because they themselves do
not expand the UGB and no development is proposed at this time.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7 AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL HAZARDS
“To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards.”
Findings:
Goal 7 requires comprehensive plans to include provisions to protect life and property based on
an inventory of known areas of natural hazards including but not limited to floods, landslides
and earthquakes. Goal 7 prohibits development in natural hazard areas without appropriate
safeguards.
1999 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps were
updated.
2004 Springfield adopted the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Eugene/Springfield
Metropolitan Area (Metro Hazard Plan).
2009 Springfield adopted an updated version of the Metro Hazard Plan.
FLOODS
Portions of the proposed UGB expansion areas have frontage on both the McKenzie and the
Middle Fork of the Willamette Rivers and are within the 100 year floodplain as well as the
floodway. The following regulations apply within Springfield’s UGB: Development within flood
hazard areas is regulated by FEMA policy, which is then adopted into the Metro Plan
(Environmental Resources Element) and the SDC (Section 3.3-400, Floodplain Overlay District).
FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) enable property and business owners to qualify for
federally underwritten flood insurance.
Attachment 1, Page 24 of 36
OTHER HAZARDS
In addition to floods, the Metro Hazards Plan addresses winter storms, landslide/debris flow,
wildfires, earthquakes, volcanic events, dam safety, hazardous materials, and terrorism.
No changes to supporting ordinances or policy documents adopted to comply with Goal 7 are
affected by the proposed SDC amendments and they do not repeal, replace or void existing
Metro Plan policy or SDC regulations with respect to any identified natural resources. However,
at this time, staff is only recommending that the Planning Commission forward a
recommendation of approval of the SDC amendments to establish the proposed AG Zoning
District and amend the PLO Zoning District to the Springfield City Council and the Lane County
Board of Commissioners. As part of the UGB expansion applications Goal 7 will be addressed, if
necessary, at that time.
Conclusion:
Springfield currently has provisions regulating development in floodplains and floodways and
other hazards specified above. However, Goal 7 does not apply to the proposed SDC
amendments because they themselves do not expand the UGB and no development is proposed
at this time.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 8 RECREATIONAL NEEDS
“To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where
appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination
resorts.”
Findings:
Goal 8 requires local governments to plan and provide for the siting of necessary recreational
facilities to “satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors.” The
destination resort provisions of Goal 8 apply to counties and therefore do not apply to the
proposed SDC amendments.
Goal 8 defines three terms that are directly related to Glenwood Phase 1:
“Open Space -- means any land that is retained in a substantially natural condition or is
improved for recreational uses such as golf courses, hiking or nature trails or equestrian or
bicycle paths or is specifically required to be protected by a conservation easement. Open
spaces may include ponds, lands protected as important natural features, land preserved for
farm or forest use and lands used as buffers. Open space does not include residential lots or
yards, streets or parking areas.”
“Recreation Areas, Facilities and Opportunities -- provide for human development and
enrichment, and include but are not limited to: open space and scenic landscapes; recreational
lands; history, archaeology and natural science resources; scenic roads and travelers; sports
and cultural events; camping, picnicking and recreational lodging; tourist facilities and
accommodations; trails; waterway use facilities; hunting; angling; winter sports; mineral
resources; active and passive games and activities.”
“Recreation Needs -- refers to existing and future demand by citizens and visitors for
recreations areas, facilities and opportunities.”
Attachment 1, Page 25 of 36
As stated previously, the WPRD is the local agency that provides parks for Springfield. The 2012
WPRD Comprehensive Plan Map 2 (a refinement of the Metro Plan) lists future park and
recreation projects. In the proposed South Millrace UGB expansion area, the following park
projects are proposed: establishing Georgia Pacific Park as a natural area; establishing
Clearwater Park as a special use park; completion of the Middle Fork multi-use path; and
construction of the Millrace multi-use path. The proposed UGB expansion will also include the
following WPRD properties in north Springfield; the Oxbow; Lively Park; and Ruff Park.
The proposed SDC amendment of the PLO Zoning District themselves do not expand the UGB
and no development is proposed at this time. However, they will update the permitted use list
regarding the provision of current and future WPRD recreation facilities. As part of the UGB
expansion applications Goal 8 will be addressed, if necessary, at that time.
Conclusion:
Springfield and the WPRD currently have provisions regulating parks and open space specified
above. However, Goal 8 complies with the proposed SDC amendments to the PLO Zoning
District. Regarding the proposed AG Zoning District, Goal 8 does not apply because only interim
farm uses are intended to be permitted.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 9 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
“To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities
vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens.”
Findings:
BACKGROUND
Economic development requires cities to maintain adequate supplies of buildable lands for
projected commercial and industrial use.
The Metropolitan Industrial Lands Special Study (MILSS) commenced in 1989 and produced two
documents, the Metropolitan Industrial Lands Inventory Report (MILIR) and the Metropolitan
Industrial Lands Policy Report (MILPR). The adopted inventory was published in July, 1993 as the
Metropolitan Industrial Lands Inventory Report (industrial lands inventory). The 1993 industrial
lands inventory identified 3,604 acres of buildable industrial land in the Eugene-Springfield UGB,
out of a total of 4,039 vacant industrial acres.
In 1995, the Springfield Commercial Lands Study (SCLS) was initiated. Springfield adopted the
study in 2000 and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)
acknowledged the SCLS as a completed periodic review task. The SCLS identified a need for an
additional 255 acres to meet the demand for commercial land to the year 2015. The study
looked only at lands within Springfield’s urban growth boundary and did not make changes to
either the Metro Plan or the Springfield Development Code.
In 2007, the Oregon legislature passed House Bill 3337 (2007 Or Laws Chapter 650). HB 3337
required Springfield and Eugene to:
Attachment 1, Page 26 of 36
Separately establish its own UGB consistent with the jurisdictional area of responsibility
specified in the Metro Plan with Interstate 5 as the dividing line.
Demonstrate that its comprehensive plan provides sufficient buildable lands to
accommodate estimated housing needs for 20 years.
Develop separate but coordinated residential lands inventory required by HB 3337.
However, Springfield chose to conduct a commercial and industrial lands inventory as well.
Springfield’s RLHNAs and its separate UGB were acknowledged by DLCD on September 2, 2011.
While there is a direct relationship between economic development and providing for the
housing needs of Springfield’s citizens, the proposed SDC amendments do not change the plan
designation of land in excess of two acres within an existing UGB from an industrial use
designation to a non-industrial use designation, or another employment use designation to any
other use designation. Thus, the proposed SDC amendments do not impact the supply of
industrial or commercial lands. That said:
660-009-0010(3) states “Cities and counties may rely on their existing plans to meet the
requirements of this division if they conclude: (a) There are not significant changes in
economic development opportunities (e.g., a need for sites not presently provided for in the
plan) based on a review of new information about national, state, regional, county and local
trends; and (b) That existing inventories, policies, and implementing measures meet the
requirements in OAR 660-009-0015 to 660-009-0030.”
However, Springfield is citing the proposed CIBL/EOA in this staff report at this time, without the
need to refer to the MILSS, MILIR, MILPR and SCLS, because the final decision on adoption of
the CIBL/EOA will be made by the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of
Commissioners in early 2014 as the CIBL/EOA is incorporated into the Springfield 2030
Refinement Plan, a refinement plan of the Metro Plan.
While the proposed SDC amendments do not affect the amount of land designated or zoned for
employment use, once adopted, the AG Zoning District will protect future employment land in
the proposed UGB expansion areas.
Conclusion:
Springfield currently has adopted land inventories described above and the CIBL/EOA is
intended to be adopted as part of the proposed UGB expansion. The CIBL/EOA demonstrates a
need for additional employment land in order to comply with Goal 9. The proposed zoning
protects newly urbanizable land added to Springfield’s UGB for the intended large site
employment uses. The proposal is consistent with the applicable provisions of Goal 9.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 10 HOUSING
“To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.”
Findings:
Goal 10 requires: buildable lands for residential use to be inventoried; and plans to encourage
the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels
commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households. OAR 660 Division 8 defines
standards for compliance with Goal 10. “Sufficient buildable land shall be designated on the
Attachment 1, Page 27 of 36
comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs by type and density range as determined in
the housing needs projection. The local buildable lands inventory must document the amount
of buildable land in each residential plan designation.”
The following has occurred:
1999 - The Eugene-Springfield Residential Lands Study (RLS) was completed.
2007 - The Oregon Legislature required Eugene and Springfield to establish separate urban
growth boundaries (UGB) that included separate 20 year residential lands inventories for
each city. In response to House Bill 3337, Springfield conducted a study to determine
Springfield’s housing needs for 2010-2030 and to evaluate the sufficiency of land available
for residential uses within Springfield’s UGB.
2009 - The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis (RLHNA) was adopted by
the Springfield City Council by Resolution 09-54 on December 7th.
2011 - The RLHNA along with the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan’s Residential Land Use
and Housing Element was adopted by City Council Ordinance 6268 on June 20, 2011 and by
Lane County Board of Commissioners Ordinance PA1274 on June 6, 2011.
Conclusion:
No residential lands are involved in the proposed SDC amendments. Therefore, Goal 10 does not
apply.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 11 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
“To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and
services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development.”
Findings:
In order to comply with Goal 11, Springfield has adopted the following documents:
The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan, revised 2004
The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan, 2001
The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area TransPlan
The Springfield Stormwater Management Plan, November 2008
The Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan, October 2008
The Springfield Wastewater Master Plan, June 2008
The Springfield Conceptual Road Network Map, updated July, 2005 The Springfield
Drinking Water Protection Plan, adopted May, 1999
The Springfield Development Code, September 2007
The Springfield Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, 2002, as amended
The Springfield 2013-17 Capital Improvement Plan
OAR 660-011-0000 Purpose
“The purpose of this division is to aid in achieving the requirements of Goal 11, Public Facilities
and Services, OAR 660-015-0000(11), interpret Goal 11 requirements regarding public facilities
and services on rural lands, and implement ORS 197.712(2)(e), which requires that a city or
county shall develop and adopt a public facility plan for areas within an urban growth
Attachment 1, Page 28 of 36
boundary containing a population greater than 2,500 persons. The purpose of the plan is to
help assure that urban development in such urban growth boundaries is guided and supported
by types and levels of urban facilities and services appropriate for the needs and requirements
of the urban areas to be serviced, and that those facilities and services are provided in a
timely, orderly and efficient arrangement, as required by Goal 11. The division contains
definitions relating to a public facility plan, procedures and standards for developing,
adopting, and amending such a plan, the date for submittal of the plan to the Commission and
standards for Department review of the plan.”
OAR 660-011-0005(1) defines "Public Facility" to include: ” …water, wastewater, sanitary
sewer, and transportation facilities. …”
However, the Metro Plan addresses the provision of these and several other public facilities and
services in Springfield. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Public Services and Facilities Plan
(PFSP), which has been acknowledged by DLCD, is a refinement plan of the Metro Plan that
guides the provision of public infrastructure, including water, wastewater, storm water
management, electricity, schools and solid waste management within Springfield’s UGB.
The proposed UGB expansion areas will require annexation, appropriate employment land use
designations and zoning, and additional refinement planning to be completed prior to
development. Upon annexation, the public facilities and services that are required under Goal
11 and the Metro Plan can be provided to properties in the proposed UGB expansion areas.
Nonetheless, at this time, staff is only recommending that the Planning Commission forward a
recommendation of approval of the SDC amendments to establish the proposed AG Zoning
District and amend the PLO Zoning District to the Springfield City Council and the Lane County
Board of Commissioners. As part of the UGB expansion applications Goal 11 will be addressed,
if necessary, at that time.
Conclusion:
Springfield currently has provisions regulating the provision of public facilities and services.
However, Goal 11 does not apply to the proposed SDC amendments because they themselves
do not expand the UGB and no development is proposed at this time.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 12 TRANSPORTATION
“To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system.”
Findings:
Applicable Transportation Regulations
Goal 12 is implemented through the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as defined in OAR 660-
012-0000, et. Seq. TransPlan provides the regional policy framework through which the TPR is
implemented at the local level. OAR 660-012-0060 states that when land use changes, including
amendments to acknowledged comprehensive plans, significantly affect an existing or planned
transportation facility the local government shall put in place measures to assure that the
allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity and performance
Attachment 1, Page 29 of 36
standards (level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility. The proposed SDC
amendments include establishing the AG Zoning District and updating the PLO Zoning District.
Metro Plan
The Metro Plan serves as Eugene, Springfield and metropolitan Lane County’s long range
policy document (comprehensive plan), guiding land use for all three jurisdictions within
the Plan’s boundaries. The Metro Plan addresses all applicable State-wide planning goals
either in the Plan itself, or through supporting facility or master plans such as local TSPs,
parks plans, etc. In order to comply with State regulations, the Metro Plan provides a
20-year land supply. However, as part of compliance with HB 3337, Springfield has established
its own UGB (June 20, 2011) and ultimately a separate, Springfield Transportation System Plan
amendment to the Metro Plan is proposed to be adopted in 2014. Applicable Metro Plan
policies are addressed elsewhere in this staff report.
TransPlan
TransPlan is the current transportation element of the Metro Plan. While adopted as a
refinement to the Metro Plan, and therefore technically a land use plan, TransPlan is also
intended as a system plan that guides local and regional transportation system planning
and development in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. TransPlan also serves as
Springfield’s TSP for identifying projects needed to meet the transportation demand of
residents over a 20-year planning horizon while addressing transportation issues and
making changes that can contribute to improvements in the region’s quality of life and
economic vitality. In addition to roadway facilities, TransPlan also calls for significant
increases in the amount and convenience of transit service, increases in the amount of
bikeways and sidewalks, and an expansion of the existing program of transportation
demand management (TDM) travel incentives. Because TransPlan is currently serving as
the locally adopted TSP for Springfield, all of its policies will be addressed as part of the
Springfield TSP update proposed to be adopted in 2014. Applicable TransPlan policies are
addressed elsewhere in this staff report.
Applicable OARs
Another purpose for the adoption and application of the AG Zoning District to land designated
UHA –E City is to support Springfield’s findings that newly urbanizable lands added to the UGB
have been assigned “interim” zoning that does not allow development that would generate
more vehicle trips than development allowed by the zoning assigned prior to inclusion in the
UGB as specified in OAR 660-024-0020(1)(d): “The transportation planning rule requirements
under OAR 660-0120-0060 need not be applied to a UGB amendment if the land added to the
UGB is zoned as urbanizable land, either by retaining the zoning that was assigned prior to
inclusion in the boundary or by assigning interim zoning that does not allow development that
would generate more vehicle trips than development allowed by the zoning assigned prior to
inclusion in the boundary.” The proposed AG Zoning District is intended to apply to lands prior
to their annexation into Springfield and prior to designation and zoning of the lands for their
intended employment uses. The interim uses permitted in the proposed AG Zoning District do
not allow development that would generate more vehicle trips than development allowed by
the previous EFU zoning assigned prior to inclusion in the UGB because a number of the current
Attachment 1, Page 30 of 36
permitted EFU uses will be prohibited, such as churches, public/private schools and airports.
That said, the proposed SDC amendment themselves do not expand the UGB and no
development is proposed at this time. Thus, Goal 12 will not be affected by the proposed SDC
amendments. Goal 12 will be addressed, if necessary, during the public hearing process for the
proposed UGB expansion applications in early 2014.
Conclusion:
Springfield currently has provisions regulating transportation systems. However, Goal 12 does
not apply to the proposed SDC amendments because they themselves do not expand the UGB
and no development is proposed at this time.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 13 ENERGY CONSERVATION
“To conserve energy. Land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so
as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic
principles.”
Findings:
When energy was cheap and easy to come by, cities were developed with little regard for
energy consumption, in terms of travel patterns, use of renewable resources and energy
efficient building materials and methods. As the availability of energy has decreased and costs
have increased, the realization that resources were not in everlasting supply became evident.
Cities have not traditionally played a major and direct role in the development of new energy
supplies. However, a city government uses or controls energy in many ways and can develop
policies and development regulations to promote energy conservation. With a limited supply of
energy available, and demand continuing to increase, conservation actions can postpone costly
development of new power generation.
Establishment of energy efficient programs is also less expensive than building new power
plants and avoids negative environmental impacts.
Goal 13 is primarily directed at the development of local energy policies and implementing
provisions. There is no implementing rule that clarifies the requirements of Goal 13. However,
Goal 13 lists the following guidelines:
“A. PLANNING
1. Priority consideration in land use planning should be given to methods of analysis and
implementation measures that will assure achievement of maximum efficiency in energy
utilization.
2. The allocation of land and uses permitted on the land should seek to minimize the
depletion of non-renewable sources of energy.
3. Land use planning should, to the maximum extent possible, seek to recycle and re-use
vacant land and those uses which are not energy efficient.
4. Land use planning should, to the maximum extent possible, combine increasing density
gradients along high capacity transportation corridors to achieve greater energy
efficiency.
5. Plans directed toward energy conservation within the planning area should consider as a
major determinant the existing and potential capacity of the renewable energy sources to
Attachment 1, Page 31 of 36
yield useful energy output. Renewable energy sources include water, sunshine, wind,
geothermal heat and municipal, forest and farm waste. Whenever possible, land
conservation and development actions provided for under such plans should utilize
renewable energy sources.
B. IMPLEMENTATION
1. Land use plans should be based on utilization of the following techniques and
implementation devices which can have a material impact on energy efficiency:
a. Lot size, dimension, and siting controls;
b. Building height, bulk and surface area;
c. Density of uses, particularly those which relate to housing densities;
d. Availability of light, wind and air;
e. Compatibility of and competition between competing land use activities; and
f. Systems and incentives for the collection, reuse and recycling of metallic and
nonmetallic waste.”
Springfield has adopted the following standards/policies to address energy efficiency:
The Oregon Residential Specialty Code 2008 (Chapter 11, Energy Efficiency).
The Oregon Structural Specialty Code 2007 (Chapter 13, Energy Efficiency). Both codes
have impacted building practices through stricter regulation and required performance
standards and will play a significant role in energy conservation now and in the future.
OAR 660-12-(000-070) requires jurisdictions to reduce vehicle miles traveled by 10% by
the year 2015; TransPlan establishes nodes to comply with the OAR through promoting
efficient transportation systems, mixed use development, encouraging alternatives to
auto trips, and making the design of new development more amenable to users of
alternative transportation such as carpooling, walking, bicycling and transit.
Transportation systems and land use patterns are directly linked to energy conservation
goals and have the potential to impact energy use.
The Springfield Development Code (various standards).
The proposed SDC amendment themselves do not expand the UGB and no development is
proposed at this time. Thus, Goal 13 will not be affected by the proposed SDC amendments.
Goal 13 will be addressed, if necessary, during the public hearing process for the proposed UGB
expansion applications in early 2014.
Conclusion:
Springfield currently has provisions regarding energy efficiency. However, Goal 13 does not
apply to the proposed SDC amendments because they themselves do not expand the UGB and
no development is proposed at this time.
STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 14 URBANIZATION
“To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to
accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to
ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities.”
Attachment 1, Page 32 of 36
Findings:
The City is addressing Goal 14 through concurrent adoption of the Springfield 2030 Refinement
Plan Urbanization Element ordinance and findings. Goal 14 requires cities to estimate future
growth and needs for land and then plan and zone enough land to meet those needs. Staff’s
responses to the Metro Plan, the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan, and Goals 9, 10, and 11
address this topic.
Implementation of the proposed AG zone is required at the time of Springfield’s UGB expansion
to demonstrate compliance with OAR 660-0240-050(6):
(6) When land is added to the UGB, the local government must assign appropriate urban plan
designations to the added land, consistent with the need determination. The local
government must also apply appropriate zoning to the added land consistent with the plan
designation or may maintain the land as urbanizable land until the land is rezoned for the
planned urban uses, either by retaining the zoning that was assigned prior to inclusion in the
boundary or by applying other interim zoning that maintains the land's potential for planned
urban development. The requirements of ORS 197.296 regarding planning and zoning also
apply when local governments specified in that statute add land to the UGB.
and 660-024-0020(1)(d):
The transportation planning rule requirements under OAR 660-012-0060 need not be applied
to a UGB amendment if the land added to the UGB is zoned as urbanizable land, either by
retaining the zoning that was assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary or by assigning
interim zoning that does not allow development that would generate more vehicle trips than
development allowed by the zoning assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary;
The proposed AG zoning is interim zoning to be assigned to urbanizable land designated UHA-E
to maintain the land’s potential for planned urban development. The AG zoning does not allow
development that would generate more vehicle trips than development allowed by the zoning
assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary.
The proposed code amendments themselves do not expand the UGB and no development is
proposed at this time.
Goal 14 will be addressed in detail during the public hearing process for the proposed UGB
expansion applications in early 2014, thereby facilitating the “efficient use of land” and “livable
communities” aspects of the Goal.
Conclusion:
The proposed SDC amendments establish an interim zoning district to address the City’s
requirements under OAR 660-0240-050(6) and OAR 660-024-0020(1)(d) —implementation of
interim zoning (the AG zoning district) to be assigned to lands added to the UGB and designated
UHA-E. The proposed SDC amendments are consistent with the applicable provisions of Goal
14.
Attachment 1, Page 33 of 36
GOAL 15: WILLAMETTE RIVER GREENWAY
“To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural,
economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the Willamette
River Greenway.”
Findings:
Background
1973 – The Oregon legislature passed the Willamette River Greenway Act House Bill 2497
(ORS 390.310-368), which established ties to a comprehensive state land use law (Oregon
Senate Bill 100) passed that same year.
1975 – The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development included the
Willamette River Greenway as one of nineteen Goals for statewide planning.
1979 – The Draft Metro Area General Plan Background Report – “Goal 15 Willamette River
Greenway. The Willamette River Greenway is the subject of individual planning processes by
Eugene, Springfield and Lane County within the metropolitan area. The draft Plan includes a
specific element reflecting the decisions resulting from those processes and elaborates on
some of the concepts of the Greenway as they might be applied to other metropolitan area
waterways. The Greenway is depicted on Auxiliary Map 2 in the draft Plan” (See also 1982
Metro Plan acknowledgement).
1980 – Lane County adopted the Willamette River Greenway Plan (See Exhibit 15-1) by
Ordinance 783 on February 27, 1980 as specified in ORS 390.318.
1980 – The Willamette Greenway Subdistrict adopted as part of the Springfield Zoning Code.
Section 13.04 discusses a Greenway Setback Line for those lands along the Willamette River
within Springfield’s jurisdiction.
1982 – The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Plan, acknowledged by LCDC, contained
Willamette Greenway policies. The jurisdictional area of the Metro Plan (i.e., Metro Plan
Boundary) was found to be in compliance with Goal 15 on September 12, 1982.
1983 – The Comprehensive Zoning Code of the City of Springfield regarding the Greenway
Setback Line is amended by Ordinance 5261.
1986 – Springfield Development Code is adopted including the Willamette Greenway (WG)
Overlay District. The WG Overlay District, currently Section 3.3-300, has not been amended
since. The Greenway Setback Line in Springfield was established as top of bank.
2003 – Letter from Rob Hallyburton, Community Services Manager, DLCD, to Greg Mott,
Susan Muir and Kent Howe regarding the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan Periodic Review
Work Program Modification – Deletion of Task 6 (Order 001578). “The director is authorized
to grant a modification to an approved periodic review work program if requested by a local
government pursuant to OAR 660-025-0170(1)(c). The rationale was that the Willamette
River Greenway work task did not relate to economic development, housing, public facilities
and services, or urbanization.
2005 - The Lane Council of Governments published Willamette River Greenway Activity in
the Metro Region (1987-2004). The document stated: “The Land Conservation and
Development Commission adopted orders approving the Oregon Department of
Transportation’s Willamette River Greenway Plan segments for Lane County and the Cities
of Eugene and Springfield where those plans were reflected in the acknowledged Metro
Plan” (Ref. P. 2) “Conclusion Activities permitted in the greenway area in the City of
Attachment 1, Page 34 of 36
Springfield from 1987-2004 are shown to be within the intent of Goal 15: The Willamette
River Greenway,” (Ref. P. 5)
The Willamette River, specifically in this case, the Middle Fork, is recognized as a valuable
natural resource that needs enhancement and protection. The Willamette Greenway is a
150-foot swath established under Goal 15 and ORS 390.318 that runs parallel to the river along
the proposed South Millrace UGB expansion area. The Metro Plan contains Greenway polices in
the Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element discussed elsewhere
in this report. SDC Section 3.3-300 Willamette Greenway (WG) Overlay District contains
regulations that apply to development within the Greenway Currently, any activity in the WG
Overlay District involving intensification of any use, change in use, or development requires
Type III Discretionary Use approval in conformance with the WG Overlay District development
criteria and concurrent Site Plan Review approval, as may be required, from the Planning
Commission.
STATE-WIDE PLANNING GOAL 16: ESTUARINE RESOURCES
“To recognize and protect the unique environmental, economic, and social values of each
estuary and associated wetlands; and To protect, maintain, where appropriate develop, and
where appropriate restore the long-term environmental, economic, and social values, diversity
and benefits of Oregon's estuaries.”
STATE-WIDE PLANNING GOAL 17: COASTAL SHORELANDS
“To conserve, protect, where appropriate, develop and where appropriate restore the
resources and benefits of all coastal shorelands, recognizing their value for protection and
maintenance of water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, water-dependent uses, economic
resources and recreation and aesthetics. The management of these shoreland areas shall be
compatible with the characteristics of the adjacent coastal waters; and To reduce the hazard
to human life and property, and the adverse
effects upon water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, resulting from the use and enjoyment
of Oregon’s coastal shorelands”.
STATE-WIDE PLANNING GOAL 18: BEACHES AND DUNES
“To conserve, protect, where appropriate develop, and where appropriate restore the
resources and benefits of coastal beach and dune areas; and To reduce the hazard to human
life and property from natural or man-induced actions associated with these areas.”
STATE-WIDE PLANNING GOAL 19: OCEAN RESOURCES
“To conserve marine resources and ecological functions for the purpose of providing long-term
ecological, economic, and social value and benefits to future generations.”
Findings
There is no estuarine, coastal, beach and dune or ocean resources in Springfield or the
metropolitan area. Therefore, Goals 16-19 do not apply.
Attachment 1, Page 35 of 36
Conclusion
Staff has demonstrated that the proposed SDC amendments comply with all applicable
Statewide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Based on the findings and conclusions in this staff report, staff has demonstrated that the
proposed SDC amendments are consistent with the applicable SDC amendment criteria of
approval (Section 5.6-115A.-C. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
attached Order and forward the proposed SDC amendments, as may be amended, to the
Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners with a recommendation
for adoption of the amending Ordinance.
Attachment 1, Page 36 of 36
ATTACHMENT 2
PROPOSED SDC AMENDMENTS
SECTION 3.2-900 AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT
OVERVIEW
Sections Proposed to be Added Reason for Amendment
3.2-905 through 3.2-920 The proposed AG Zoning District along with the Urban
Holding Area -Employment (UHA-E) designation1 (under
separate review but which must be approved
simultaneously at the legislative level2), will implement
the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Economic and
Urbanization Element policies that the City, in
cooperation with Lane County, proposes to adopt in
early 2014 to comply with Statewide Planning Goals 9,
Economic Development and 14, Urbanization.
Compliance means that Springfield must demonstrate
that it has applied the appropriate designation and
zoning to proposed UGB expansion areas to ensure that
permitted “interim” uses will not preclude use of these
sites for future intended employment purposes. The
proposed UGB expansion areas under consideration for
employment uses are currently designated Agriculture
and zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) by Lane County.
Since EFU zoning only applies to those lands outside of a
UGB, in order for certain existing EFU “farm uses” to
continue or expand, the proposed AG Zoning District
interim permitted use list incorporates the farm uses
specified in ORS 308A.056. Existing uses not on the
proposed AG District permitted use list will not be
allowed; these uses will be considered pre-existing,
1 The Urban Holding Area (UHA) concept has been used in a number of communities, but the basis for Springfield’s
proposed UHA land use designation for the planned UGB expansion comes from Redmond Oregon. Redmond’s
UGB expansion project was completed in 2006 under a State Planning Grant. The project earned a 2006 Special
Achievement in Planning Award from the Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association.
2 OAR 660-024-0050(6) states: “When land is added to the UGB, the local government must assign appropriate
urban plan designation to the added land, consistent with the need determination. The local government must
also apply appropriate zoning to the added land consistent with the plan designation or may maintain the land
as urbanizable land until the land is rezoned for the planned urban uses, either by retaining the zoning that was
assigned prior to the inclusion in the boundary or by applying interim zoning that maintains the lands potential
for planned urban development.”
Attachment 2, Page 1 of 15
non-conforming uses and may continue as specified in
SDC Section 5.8-100.
6.1-110 A definition for the “Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan”
is proposed.
Commentary. Proposed text is shown as: text added, beginning on Page 10.
Section 3.2-900 Agricultural (AG) District
Subsections
3.2-905 Establishment of the Agricultural District
3.2-910 Applicability
3.2-915 Schedule of Use Categories
3.2-920 Base Zoning Standards
3.2-905 Establishment of the Agricultural (AG) District
Commentary. The primary intent of the Agricultural District is to protect large tracts of future
Employment land. Therefore, a minimum acreage standard is proposed (however, this number may
change during the legislative review process) and Subdivisions, Partitions and Property Line Adjustments
must therefore be prohibited until after Annexation to Springfield.
A. The AG District is applied concurrently with the Urban Holding Area – Employment (UHA-E)
Metro Plan/”Springfield Refinement Plan” land use designation at the time of a Springfield
Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion.
B. The AG District preserves 20 acre or larger newly urbanizable lands for future Employment use
until land is converted to urban development in accordance with Oregon Administrative Rule
660-024-0050(6).
C. In order to preserve the large tracts of undeveloped or underdeveloped newly urbanizable
lands, Subdivisions and Partitions, and Property Line Adjustments in the AG District that reduce
tracts of land below 20 acres in size shall be prohibited until after Annexation to Springfield.
3.2-910 Applicability
Commentary. When the proposed UGB expansion areas are finalized, a revised map will be prepared and
placed here.
The provisions of the AG District apply only to the newly urbanizable lands shown in Map 3.2-1.
PLACE HOLDER
Attachment 2, Page 2 of 15
3.2-915 Schedule of Use Categories
Commentary. The intent is that except for some “S” uses, in most cases, only a building permit will be
required for outright permitted uses in the proposed AG District.
The following uses are permitted in the AG District, subject to the provisions, additional restrictions and
exceptions specified in this Code:
“P” = PERMITTED USE subject to the standards of this Code.
“S” = SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS subject to special locational and/or siting standards as
specified in Section 4.7-100. Note: Some uses in this category may require Site Plan Review and/or
Discretionary Use approval.
“D” = DISCRETIONARY USE subject to review and analysis under Type III procedure (Section 5.9-
100) at the Planning Commission or Hearings Official level.
Commentary. The categories and uses are from several Development Codes.
Use Categories/Uses AG
Accessory Uses
Community Gardens P
Composting Facilities P
Sales/Display of Produce (Subsection 4.8-125) S
Farm Uses
Dairying and selling dairy products P
Feeding, breeding, managing or selling livestock, poultry, fur-bearing animals or honeybees
or their produce
P
On-site constructing and maintaining equipment and facilities used for the activities
described as farm uses
P
Preparing, storing or disposing of, by marketing or otherwise, the products or by-products
raised for human or animal use on farm land
P
Propagating, cultivating, maintaining or harvesting aquatic species and bird and animal
species to the extent allowed by the rules adopted by the State Fish and Wildlife
Commission
P
Raising, harvesting and selling crops P
Stabling or training equines, including but not limited to providing riding lessons, training
clinics and schooling shows
P
Using farm land any other agricultural or horticultural use or animal husbandry or any
combination of these uses
P
Entertainment and Recreation
Equestrian Trails P
Farm Related Activities and Events, including, but not limited to: harvest festivals or tours of
heritage farms.
P
Lodging
Bed and Breakfast Facilities within an existing single family dwelling (Subsection 4.7-120) S
Attachment 2, Page 3 of 15
Use Categories/Uses AG
Residential
Single Family Dwelling in conjunction with a farm use (either site built or manufactured) 1
Per Lot/Parcel P
Emergency Medical Hardship (Subsection 5.10-100) P
Room and Board Arrangements for a Maximum of 5 Unrelated Persons in an Existing Single
Family Dwelling
P
Resource Protection
Wetland and or Riparian Protection and Restoration P
Utilities and Communication
High Impact Utility Facility (Subsection 4.7-160) S
Low Impact Utility Facility P
Telecommunication Tower or Facility (Subsection 4.3-145) P/D
Other Commercial Services
Child Care Facilities (Subsection 4.7-125) S
Extraction and Bottling of Water P
Home Occupation (Subsection 4.7-155) S
Kennel, on-site P
3.2-920 Base Zoning Standards
In the AG District: proposed development, either a new permitted use specified in Subsection 3.2-915;
or the expansion of a lawful pre-existing non-conforming use, as may be allowed as specified in Section
5.8-100, shall:
A. Receive certification from the Lane County Sanitarian that any proposed wastewater disposal
system meets Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (D.E.Q.) standards prior to
Development Approval.
Commentary. The base zone development setback standards are based upon those in Lane County
Chapter 10.
B. Utilize the following base zone development standards:
Base Zone Development Standards
Main Building Height 35 feet Front, Street and Rear Yard Setback 20 feet (2)
Accessory Building Height 35 feet (1) Interior Side Yard Setback 15 feet(2)
Minimum Lot/Parcel Frontage None Minimum Lot/Parcel Depth None
(1) Water tanks, silos, granaries, barns and similar accessory structures or necessary mechanical appurtenances
may exceed the minimum height standard.
(2) Accessory buildings rear and interior side yard setbacks are 5 feet.
Attachment 2, Page 4 of 15
6.1-110 Meaning of Specific Words and Terms
Commentary. A definition for the “Springfield Refinement Plan” is proposed.
Springfield Refinement Plan. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan is an adopted City-wide refinement
of the Metro Plan and is applicable to all lands within Springfield’s Urban Growth Boundary. This
document is referenced as the “Springfield Refinement Plan” in the SDC text in order to differentiate
this document from other refinement plans, including, but not limited to: the Gateway Refinement Plan
and the Glenwood Refinement Plan.
SECTION 3.2-700 PUBLIC LAND AND OPEN SPACE ZONING DISTRICT
OVERVIEW
Subsections Proposed to be Amended Reason for Amendment
3.2-705 through 3.2-715 This proposed SDC amendment is being coordinated
with the concurrent Urban Growth Boundary (UGB)
expansion applications and will apply not only to the
proposed South Millrace expansion area, but to all land
in Springfield that is zoned Public Land and Open Space
(PLO). This will ensure that the current and future
needs of SUB and Willamalane can be accommodated
by providing a more comprehensive permitted use list
for existing and new public uses that were not
contemplated when the PLO District was first
established in the mid- 1980’s.
4.7-200/203 Currently, there is duplicate text in these two
Subsections regarding “special use” provisions. Staff
proposes that they be combined into one renamed
Subsection.
6.1-110 Currently, there is duplicate text pertaining to
“High/Low Impact Utility Facilities” in this Subsection.
Staff proposes that the term “Public Utility Facility” be
amended to be consistent with the revisions to Sections
3.2-705 through 3.2-715.
Attachment 2, Page 5 of 15
Note: Because there are a number of proposed amendments, current Sections 3.2-705 through 3.2-715
will be deleted in their entirety. Current text proposed to be deleted is shown as: [strike through].
Proposed text is shown as: text added.
Section 3.2-700 Public Land and Open Space Zoning District
3.2-705 Establishment of the Public Land and Open Space (PLO) District
A. Establishment of the PLO District includes the following categories:
1. Government uses, including public offices and facilities;
2. Educational uses, including high schools and colleges; and
3. Parks and open space uses including, publicly owned metropolitan and regional
scale parks and publicly and privately owned golf courses and cemeteries.
B. The PLO District shall also be permitted on properties designated other than Public and Semi-
Public as specified in the Metro Plan, a refinement plan, or plan district.
3.2-710 Schedule of Use Categories
The following buildings and uses are permitted in this district as indicated subject to the provisions,
additional restrictions and exceptions specified in this Code.
“P” = PERMITTED USE subject to the standards of this Code.
“S” = SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS subject to special locational and/or siting standards as
specified in Section 4.7-100.
“D” = DISCRETIONARY USE subject to review and analysis under Type III procedure (Section 5.9-100) at
the Planning Commission or Hearings Official level.
SITE PLAN REVIEW SHALL BE REQUIRED, unless exempted elsewhere in this Code.
Use Categories/ Uses PLO District
Primary Uses (Section 4.7-203)
Education
Colleges S
High Schools S
Private/Public Elementary and Middle Schools S
Government
Libraries S
Senior/Adult Activity Centers S
Courts S
Fire Stations D
Attachment 2, Page 6 of 15
Use Categories/ Uses PLO District
Primary Uses (Section 4.7-203)
Administrative offices S
Museums S
Neighborhood and community centers S
Performing arts centers S
Plazas and other sites of public interest S
Police satellite facilities D
Post offices S
Public transit facilities D
Sports complexes/stadiums D
Justice Center, a building, including, but not limited to: a police station,
courts, administrative offices and a jail
D
Parks and Open Spaces
Public and private parks and recreational facilities:
Neighborhood Parks P
Community Parks S
Regional Parks S
Private areas of greater than 1 acre reserved for open space as part of a
cluster or hillside development
P
Publicly and privately owned golf courses and cemeteries D
R.V. parks and campgrounds within a regional park S
R.V. parks and campgrounds outside of a regional park and without
sanitary sewer service as a temporary use subject to termination when
within 1,000 feet of sanitary sewer
D
Secondary Uses (Section 4.7-203)
Agricultural cultivation of undeveloped land P
Cafeteria and restaurants primarily serving the patrons of the
development
P
Child care facilities P
Heliports and helistops D
Office and storage yards that are incidental to a primary use P
Mortuaries and chapels associated with cemeteries D
Maintenance and security residences, excluding mobile homes D
Low impact public facilities P
High impact public facilities (Section 4.7-160) D
Certain Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities (Section 4.3-145)
Wellness center S
Use Categories/ Uses PLO District
Primary Uses (Section 4.7-203)
Parking structures S
3.2-715 Base Zone Development Standards
Attachment 2, Page 7 of 15
The following base zone development standards are established. The base zone development standards
of this Section and any other additional provisions, restrictions or exceptions specified in this Code shall
apply.
Development Standard PLO Zoning District Requirement
Minimum Lot/parcel Size None
Lot/parcel Coverage and
Planting Standard
Parking, driveways and structures shall not exceed 65 percent of the
development area. At least 25 percent of the development area shall be
landscaped. EXCEPTION: In the Downtown Exception Area, there shall be no
minimum lot coverage standards and no minimum planted area, except for
parking lots (6).
Landscaped Setbacks(1), (2), (3) and (4)
Street Setback 15 feet (6)
Residential Property Line 20 feet (6)
Parking and Driveway 5 feet
Maximum Building Height(5) None, unless abutting a residential district
PLO District abuts Residential
District
When a PLO District abuts a residential district, the maximum building
height shall be defined as the height standard of the applicable residential
district for a distance of 50 feet measured from the boundary of the
adjacent residential zoning district. Beyond the 50-foot measurement, there
is no building height limitation.
(1) Where an easement is larger than the required setback standard, no building or above grade structure, except
a fence, shall be built upon or over that easement.
(2) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City Engineering standards, the Metro Plan (including
TransPlan), or the City’s Conceptual Street Plan, setbacks are based on future right-of-way locations.
Dedication of needed right-of-way shall be required prior to the issuance of any building permit that increases
parking or gross floor area.
(3) Structural extensions may extend into any 5-foot or larger setback area by not more than 2 feet.
(4) In the Downtown Exception Area, there are no minimum setbacks for administrative offices and other public
uses listed under Section 3.2-710.
(5) Incidental equipment may exceed the height standards.
(6) In the Downtown Exception Area, there shall be no minimum planted area except for parking lots as specified
elsewhere in this Code.
3.2-705 Establishment of the Public land and Open Space (PLO) District
Commentary: This statement is new and coordinates other “Plans” with the Metro Plan Public and
Semi-Public land use designation. Note: The “Springfield Refinement Plan” refers to the Springfield 2030
Refinement Plan. A definition of this term is proposed in Subsection 6.1-110. below.
The PLO District implements the Metro Plan Public and Semi-Public land use designation, the most-
recently adopted “Springfield Refinement Plan”, the Willamalane Park and Recreation Comprehensive
Plan, the SUB/Rainbow Water Management Conservation Plan and any other applicable plans by
providing land for:
Attachment 2, Page 8 of 15
Commentary: The three categories contained in the Metro Plan Public Semi-Public land use designation
are now more specific. Note: The Metro Plan Public Semi-Public land use designation is represented by
only two colors on the Metro Plan diagram: Blue for Government and Education and Green for Parks
and Open Space.
A. Government. This category includes, but is not limited to: buildings and facilities that are owned
and operated by federal, state, or local governments; public utilities; special districts; or
nonprofit organizations that provide governmental or public services;
B. Education. This category includes, but is not limited to: public high schools, colleges and
universities; and
C. Parks and Open Space. This category includes, but is not limited to: both publicly and privately
owned open, natural, and improved park and recreational areas. These areas serve many
functions including:
1. Maintaining and enhancing the quality of life of Springfield’s residents;
2. Providing opportunities for outdoor recreation;
3. Providing contrasts to the built environment;
4. Preserving scenic views to the greatest extent practicable;
5. Protecting sensitive or fragile environmental areas;
6. Preserving the capacity and water quality of the stormwater drainage system and the
Wellhead Protection Areas; and
7. Providing pedestrian and bicycle transportation connections.
3.2-710 Schedule of Use Categories
The following buildings and facilities are permitted in this district as indicated subject to the provisions,
additional restrictions and exceptions specified in this Code.
“P” = PERMITTED USE subject to the standards of this Code.
“S” = SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS subject to special locational and/or siting standards as
specified in Section 4.7-100.
“D” = DISCRETIONARY USE subject to review and analysis under Type III procedure (Section 5.9-100) at
the Planning Commission or Hearings Official level.
SITE PLAN REVIEW SHALL BE REQUIRED, unless exempted elsewhere in this Code.
Attachment 2, Page 9 of 15
Commentary: The “primary use” list has been reorganized by use category and a number of “new” uses
highlighted in yellow have been added in collaboration with Willamalane and SUB. The primary use list
is consistent with the three categories proposed in Section 3.2-705.
Use Categories/ Uses PLO District
Primary Uses
Government (Public) Buildings and Facilities including, but not limited to:
City Hall P
Conference and Community Meeting Rooms P
County Solid Waste Disposal Sites D
Court Houses P
Electrical Generating Plants D
Electric Vehicle Charging Stations P
Electric Power Transmission Lines and Substations greater than 69 KV
(Section 4.7-160) (1)
S
Electric Power Transmission Lines and Substations up to 69 KV P
Fiber Optic Lines and Facilities P
Fire/Ambulance Stations (Section 4.7-160) (1) S
Gas Pipelines, Fuel Storage Facilities and Fuel Distribution Points D
Indoor Storage P
Justice Center - a building, including, but not limited to: a police station,
courts, administrative offices and a jail
P
Libraries P
Low Impact Utility Facilities P
Maintenance/Utility Operations Shops (2) P/D
Museums P
Neighborhood and Community Centers P
Offices P
Outdoor Storage Yards (stand alone)(2) P/D
Parking Lots (stand alone), including Park and Ride Lots P
Parking Structures P
Performing Arts Centers P
Police Satellite Stations P
Post Offices P
Public Safety Training Sites D
Senior/Adult Activity Centers P
Stormwater Facilities P
Transit Stations and Park and Rides P
Wastewater Treatment Facilities (Section 4.7-160) (1) S
Water Distribution Facilities, Aboveground P
Water Intake Facilities P
Water Reservoirs/Tanks greater than 300,000 gallons or 30 feet in height
(Section 4.7-160) (1)
S
Water Treatment Facilities less that 2.5 million gallon capacity per day P
Attachment 2, Page 10 of 15
Use Categories/ Uses PLO District
Water Treatment Facilities 2.5 million gallon capacity per day or more
(Section 4.7-160) (1)
S
Water, Wastewater , or Stormwater Pump Stations P
Water Wells and Associated Facilities P
Education Facilities including, but not limited to:
Public Colleges and Universities P
Public (including Charter ) High Schools S
Public Special Training Schools for Trade, Vocational, Business, and the
Arts
P
Other Primary Uses
Agricultural Cultivation of Undeveloped Land P
Public Parks and Public/Private Open Space including, but not limited to:
Public Parks (Section 4.7-200)(3) S
Publicly/Privately Owned Golf Courses and Cemeteries D
Willamette River Greenway (between the river and the Setback Line) D
Secondary Uses
Accessory Structures, Detached or Attached P
Cafeteria and Restaurants primarily serving the employees, students or
users of the primary use
P
Child Care Facilities primarily serving the employees of the primary use P
Heliports and Helistops D
Mausoleums, Chapels, and Similar Accessory Structures associated with
cemeteries
D
On-site access roads for maintenance vehicles P
Outdoor Storage Yards incidental to a primary use P
Parking Lots associated with primary uses P
Solar Generation on Land or Attached to Buildings and/or Facilities P
Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities (Section 4.3-145) P/D
Wellness Center (Section 4.7-203G.) S
(1) High Impact Utility Facilities includes. any water system, wastewater system, stormwater system or electrical
facility that is sized to qualify for inclusion in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and
Services Plan, including but not limited to: electric power transmission lines and substations (greater than 69 KV;
gas pipe line valve stations; wastewater treatment plants or effluent ponds; water reservoirs and water storage
tanks greater than 300,000 gallons or 30 feet in height; water treatment facilities, including filtration plants greater
than 2.5 million gallon capacity per day; and fire/ambulance stations. These uses are specifically listed above as a
Special Use.
(2) When abutting residential and/or commercial (including mixed-use) designations and zones Discretionary Use
approval will be required.
(3) Public Parks includes Neighborhood Parks, Community Parks, Natural Area Parks, Linear Parks, Special Use
Parks, Sports Parks and Community Recreation Facilities as may be listed and defined in the most recently adopted
Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan.
Attachment 2, Page 11 of 15
3.2-715 Base Zone Development Standards
Commentary: Only minor formatting and setback amendments are proposed in this Subsection. Note:
Currently, there is no interior side yard setback.
The following base zone development standards are established. The base zone development standards
of this Section and any other additional provisions, restrictions or exceptions specified in this Code shall
apply.
Development Standard PLO Zoning District Requirement
Minimum Lot/Parcel Size None
Lot/parcel Coverage and
Planting Standards for
Buildings and Structures
Parking, driveways and structures shall not exceed 65 percent of the
development area. At least 25 percent of the development area shall be
landscaped (6).
Landscaped Setbacks(1), (2), (3) and (4)
Front, Rear or Street Side
Yard Setback, Primary
Building or Structure
15 feet (6)
Front, Rear or Street Side
Yard Setback, Accessory
Building or Structure
10 feet (6)
Interior Side Yard Setback 5 feet (6)
Residential Property Line 20 feet (6)(7)
Parking/Driveway Setback 5 feet
Maximum Building/Facility
Height
None (5)
(1) Where an easement is larger than the required setback standard, no building or above grade structure,
except a fence, shall be built upon or over that easement.
(2) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City Engineering standards, the Metro Plan (including
TransPlan), or the City’s Conceptual Street Plan, setbacks are based on future right-of-way locations.
Dedication of needed right-of-way shall be required prior to the issuance of any building permit that increases
parking or gross floor area.
(3) Structural extensions may extend into any 5-foot or larger setback area by not more than 2 feet.
(4) In the Downtown Exception Area or nodal development areas, there are no minimum setbacks for
administrative offices and other public uses listed under Section 3.2-710.
(5) Height Exceptions.
A. When a PLO District abuts a residential district, the maximum building or facility height shall be defined as
the height standard of the applicable residential district for a distance of 50 feet measured from the
boundary of the adjacent residential property. Beyond the 50-foot measurement, there is no building height
limitation. In the case of overhead electric facilities, the 50 foot measurement does not apply.
B. Incidental equipment may exceed the height standards.
(6) In the Downtown Exception Area, there shall be no minimum planted area except for parking lots as
specified in Section 3.2-710.
(7) Stadiums, outdoor swimming pools and other major noise generators within community parks, sports parks
and community recreation facilities shall be located at least 30 feet from residential property lines and
screened by a noise attenuating barrier
Attachment 2, Page 12 of 15
Commentary: While researching the proposed PLO District amendments, staff found two similar special
use standards for public parks. Current Subsection 4.7-200 is amended as proposed below. Subsection
4.7-203 is proposed to be deleted.
4.7-200 Public and Private Parks
Public parks shall be designated in the Metro Plan including the Willamalane Park and Recreation
District Comprehensive Plan or be approved in accordance with a Discretionary Use application as
specified in Section 5.9-100.
A. Standards for Public and Private Parks in the BKMU District.
1. Community Parks shall be designated on a Park Facilities Plan adopted by the City, or be
approved in accordance with Type III review procedure (Discretionary Use).
2. A Traffic Impact Study shall be prepared by a Traffic Engineer and approved by the City
Engineer.
B. Standards for Public and Private Parks in the PLO District.
1. Primary access shall be on arterial or collector streets unless specified or exempted
elsewhere in this Section.
2. Stadiums, swimming pools and other major noise generators within parks shall be
located at least 30 feet from residential property lines and screened by a noise
attenuating barrier.
3. Community and regional parks shall be designated on a Park Facilities Plan adopted by
the City, or be approved in accordance with Type III review procedure (Discretionary
Use).
4. A traffic impact and parking study shall be prepared by a Traffic Engineer and approved
by the City Engineer.
C. Standards for the Urbanizable Fringe Overlay District. Neighborhood Parks shall be shown on the
Metro Plan or an adopted refinement plan, or shall be reviewed under Type III Discretionary Use
procedures.
4.7-203 Public Land and Open Space
A. Primary access shall be on arterial or collector streets except as provided or exempted
elsewhere in Section 3.2-700.
B. Stadiums, swimming pools and other major noise generators shall be located at least 30 feet
from residential property lines and shall be screened by a noise attenuating barrier.
Attachment 2, Page 13 of 15
C. Community and regional parks shall comply with the criteria specified in Section 4.7-200B.
D. For all special uses, a traffic impact study shall be prepared as specified in Section 4.2-105A.4.
E. R.V. parks and campgrounds within regional parks shall comply with the standards specified in
Section 4.7-220D.
F. Private/Public Elementary and Middle Schools shall meet the standards specified in Section 4.7-
195.
G. Wellness centers shall comply with the criteria specified in Section 4.7-250.
H. Pedestrian amenities for public buildings in mixed uses Metro Plan land use designations as
specified in Section 3.2-625G.
4.7-200 Public Parks
Commentary: The text below refers to the revised park/recreation facilities categories in the recently
adopted Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan based upon potential impact on
surrounding properties and specifies when a Traffic Impact Study and the classification of street where
access is specifically required.
Standards for New Public Parks in the PLO District.
A. Community parks, sports parks and community recreation facilities shall be designated in the
Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan, or be approved in accordance with
Type III Discretionary Use application as specified in Section 5.9-100.
B. A Traffic Impact Study for the parks/facilities listed in Subsection A. shall be prepared by a Traffic
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer.
C. Primary access for the parks/facilities listed in Subsection A. shall be on arterial or collector
streets unless specified or exempted elsewhere in this Code.
D. Stadiums, outdoor swimming pools and other major noise generators within parks listed in
Subsection A. shall be located at least 30 feet from residential property lines and screened by a
noise attenuating barrier.
6.1-110 Meaning of Specific Words and Terms
Commentary: While researching the proposed PLO District amendments, staff found two different
definitions for high and low impact public utility facilities. The definitions below are proposed to be
deleted because they are vague and are not consistent with the proposed amended definitions.
High Impact Facility. A public or semi-public facility which serves development and which requires pre-
planning or discretionary approval and special design features to mitigate land use conflicts, including,
but not limited to, visual, olfactory, or auditory impacts.
Attachment 2, Page 14 of 15
Low Impact Facility. Any public or semi-public facility that has minimal olfactory, visual or auditory
impacts which is permitted subject to the design standards of this Code.
Commentary: These definitions have been updated with input from SUB to better differentiate Low
Impact Public Utility Facilities from High Impact Public Utility Facilities as proposed above.
Public Utility Facility. Structures, facilities and equipment necessary to serve development by a
government, public utility, utility cooperative, or private company.
A. Low Impact. Telephone and cable telephone lines, poles, junction boxes, exchanges and
repeater stations; electric power distribution lines (less than 69 KV) and poles; sanitary sewer
pipe lines, pumps or lift stations; storm sewer pipe lines, ditches and other storm-water
management or water quality ponds, wetland, or swales; gas distribution pipe lines; water pipe
lines, valves, well fields, pump stations and attendant facilities; water reservoirs and water
storage tanks less than 300,000 gallons or 30 feet in height, and water treatment facilities,
including filtration plants, less than 2.5 million gallon capacity per day.
B. High Impact. Electric power transmission lines (greater than 69 KV), poles and substations; gas
pipe line valve stations; sanitary sewer treatment plants or effluent ponds; water reservoirs and
water storage tanks greater than 300,000 gallons or 30 feet in height; water treatment facilities,
including filtration plants greater than 2.5 million gallon capacity per day; fire/ambulance
stations.
Commentary: These definitions have been updated to better differentiate Low Impact Public Utility
Facilities from High Impact Public Utility Facilities. There was no way to capture all of the possible low
impact uses, so the current list of low impact uses is proposed to be deleted. Under the high impact
uses, a reference is made to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities Services Plan.
Public Utility Facility. Structures, facilities and equipment necessary to serve development by a
government, public utility, utility cooperative or private company.
A. Low Impact. Any public water system, wastewater system, stormwater system or
electrical facility that does not meet the definition for High Impact Facilities.
B. High Impact. Any water system, wastewater system, stormwater system or electrical
facility that is sized to qualify for inclusion in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area
Public Facilities and Services Plan, including but not limited to: electric power
transmission lines and substations (greater than 69 KV; gas pipe line valve stations;
wastewater treatment plants or effluent ponds; water reservoirs and water storage
tanks greater than 300,000 gallons or 30 feet in height; water treatment facilities,
including filtration plants greater than 2.5 million gallon capacity per day; and
fire/ambulance stations.
Attachment 2, Page 15 of 15
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR:
AMENDMENTS TO THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE TO: ESTABLISH THE AGRICULTURAL (AG) ] TYP413-00007
ZONING DISTRICT (SUBSECTIONS 3.2-900 THROUGH 3.2-920); REVISE THE CURRENT PUBLIC LAND ]
AND OPEN SPACE (PLO) ZONING DISTRICT (SUBSECTIONS 3.2-700 THROUGH 3.2-715); REVISE PUBLIC ]
AND PRIVATE PARK SPECIAL USE STANDARDS (SUBSECTIONS 4.7-200 AND 4.7-203); AND ADDING/ ]
AMENDING TERMS RELATED TO THE ABOVE (SUBSECTION 6.1-110) ]
NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL
Staff is requesting that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Springfield
City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners regarding the following proposed amendments to the
Springfield Development Code:
The proposed AG Zoning District (SDC 3.2-900 et. Seq.) will implement the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Economic and Urbanization Element policies that the City, in cooperation with Lane County, is scheduled to adopt in
early 2014 to comply with Statewide Planning Goals 9, Economic Development and 14, Urbanization. Compliance
means that Springfield must demonstrate that it has applied the appropriate designation and zoning to proposed
UGB expansion areas to ensure that permitted “interim” uses will not preclude use of these sites for future intended
employment purposes. The proposed AG Zoning District permitted uses will be allowed until urban employment
development is planned and the land is annexed to Springfield. At that time, an appropriate “permanent“ Springfield
employment designation and zoning will be applied.
Proposed Amendments to the PLO Zoning District (SDC 3.2-700 et. Seq.). The proposed South Millrace UGB
expansion areas contains a number of sites owned and utilized by the WPRD, SUB and the City, some of which are
zoned PLO. Upon staff review, it was found that the current PLO use list that was first prepared in the mid 1980’s is
not adequate to address Willamalane’s and SUB’s current and future development needs. However, the proposed
amendments will apply to all properties zoned PLO within Springfield’s UGB.
Revise the Public and Private Park Special Use Standards (SDC 4.7-200 and 4.7-203)
Amend/Add definitions in SDC 6.1-110 related to the above.
Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to SDC Section 5.2-115.
On November 19, 2013, the Springfield Planning Commission held a work session and on December 18, 2013, a public
hearing on the proposed SDC amendments. The staff report and written comments were entered into the record.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the proposed amendments are consistent with the criteria of SDC Section 5.6-115A.-C. This
general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report and Findings and the
additional information submitted for the December 18, 2013 public hearing.
ORDER/RECOMMENDATION
It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of Case Number TYP413-00007 be GRANTED and a
RECOMMENDATION for approval be forwarded to the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of
Commissioners for their consideration in early 2014.
____________________________ ____________________
Planning Commission Chairperson Date
ATTEST
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Attachment 3, Page 1 of 1